• 0 Posts
  • 96 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 30th, 2023

help-circle


  • Politicians aren’t activists, you’re just confused on how the system works. If you want politicians to change the only thing you can do is apply pressure through their constituents. That means changing minds and motivating people to action. Politicians want to stay in office and largely will be swayed by a shift in public opinion. The right wing is winning because their brand of crazy is highly motivated. It’s easier to moan on the Internet than change minds and change laws.

    But changing laws is not as hard as most people believe. A handful of motivated people can change a state law simply by convincing people in their district to call and apply pressure on their behalf. Constituent lobbying is incredibly effective, 10 people convince 10 people each to apply pressure to the right people and suddenly a 45/55 vote becomes 51/49 seemingly over night. I’ve been a part of that more than once to great success. You just gotta put in the work.

    Changing minds is harder though, we are competing against media conglomerates that mostly don’t care about truth. But it can happen with work.

    Over time that work translates into different politicians, the state I’m in (Minnesota) keeps inching left a hair at a time because the work that is needed keeps happening. It doesn’t happen fast, but it does happen.






  • Most of those where cops only larping as military. Military operations are a completely different thing. No country wants to fight their own people. Your own logistics, intelligence, supply chains, and financing all rely, in part, on the very people you are fighting… You can’t trust or count on the chain of command at any point, at any point your keys to power can turn on you and you’re dead. Leaders with half a brain know you usually don’t have a long life attacking your own people.




  • MonkRome@lemmy.worldtoMalicious Compliance@lemmy.worldWork from home
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    6 days ago

    My sister in law is blind in one eye, but because she has one working eye she has no disability protection as far as I know. She still can’t drive because she has no depth perception and it’s very dangerous. It’s made navigating going to work difficult over the years, often working the same place my brother did so he could drive her. Luckily her current employer works with her and lets her work from home. But a decade ago no one would have dreamed of letting her work from home.




  • I don’t doubt anything you are saying, but it’s worth mentioning that (iirc) 80%+ of severe injury and death on a bicycle is caused by motor vehicles, or complications of motor vehicle involvement. People very rarely have severe injury or death on dedicated bike infrastructure. The primary risk on bicycles is motor vehicles. If you remove motor vehicles, there is still risks, but someone might decide that risk is low enough to forgo a helmet. I don’t feel those people should be called stupid for their choice.

    There is considerable evidence that everyone wearing a helmet in a car would save vastly more lives and prevent severe head injury, and yet pretty much no one even considers that as a normal thing to do. The bike helmet thing is therefore just as much a cultural attitude, as it is about safety.

    I still use a helmet, and more importantly, visibility gear, on my bicycle in 100% of my rides. I’ve never worn a bike helmet walking or driving in a car, even though my cousin died from a head injury getting hit by a car while walking and my grandma-in-law died of a head injury in a car…


  • MonkRome@lemmy.worldtoNo Stupid Questions@lemmy.worldPros / cons of riding a bike?
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    23 days ago

    A helmet is only needed if you intend to spend significant time in traffic. Most of the world doesn’t use one.

    The math behind using one is a lot more on the margins than people realize. In order for it to save you, it first has to prevent a head injury, and then prevent one that is in the range of severity that makes it useful. The vast majority of bike injuries won’t fall in that range, they’ll either be related to another part of the body, or in the case of high speed crashes from a car, too severe for a helmet to matter. But helmets do give people a false sense of security. Statistically people ride faster and take more risks with a helmet on. Lastly, again statistically, the visibility gear you put on yourself while riding does more to keep you safe in traffic than a helmet. Lights, reflectors, reflective vest, etc.

    All this to say, the religiosity with which people proselytize helmets is misplaced. I still wear one, but I don’t judge people who choose not to.





  • Under your simplified system a person making 55k brings in less than someone making 49k. Which disincentives getting a raise at that salary range. There is a reason that currently we only tax money over the brackets set.

    Progressive taxation isn’t really the problem here though, our low tax on investment profit is. We should also probably enforce a 2% wealth tax on anyone making over a billion dollars.