What’s so stupid about this is that if Trump really did believe in autarky, there are ways to advance that without wrecking the economy. In fact, a good case can be made that we could use simpler supply chains. Covid showed that. If Trump wanted to push some broad bipartisan bill through Congress that would greatly reduce net trade, he could probably do it.

But the way to do that properly isn’t to do it all at once. You phase in tariffs over years. You announce the schedule well in advance, and you give people and companies plenty of time to adapt. Want to phase out NAFTA? Well, the people seemed to have voted for that. So maybe phase it out over 20 years.

But Trump is a moron, so he tries to do everything all at once by fiat.

And that’s the problem with liberals. The bar is so low it’s in Hell.

No. It shouldn’t.

Is that not enough? You prefer Trump to not-Trump?

People are tired of this shit. Democrats have been running on this for 20 years at this point. We’re at the point where people would rather see Trump dismantle the entire federal government than vote for one more Democrat promising, that this time, they actually will make meaningful change.

People are just done with this. Democrats have repeatedly failed to make government work for people. If government won’t work for people, why would people care if Trump’s going to come in and tear everything down?

The two party system can collapse. It has several times before. What needs to happen is for the Democratic Party to go the way of the Whigs.

deleted by creator

In many ways it is. The actual science on trans athletics supports policies like those sports agencies have typically used - allowing people to compete if they’ve been on certain hormonal treatments for a specific period of time. Cis athletes also have advantages and disadvantages, relative to each other, based on testosterone level. Trans women on HRT are well within that range of performance. In many sports, trans women are actually at a disadvantage to cis women, due to the fact that trans women tend to have lower testosterone levels than cis women.

In other words, the science is completely against sports bans. There is no logical reason to do them. The truly scientific solution is to consider sports on an individual basis, and let the sport figure out what advantage/disadvantage trans folks might have. Then, if that advantage/disadvantage is well within normal player ranges, then competing is fine. If not, if it’s an individual sport, maybe a handicap system. If it’s a group sport, well maybe rules about how many trans people can be on any one team. Etc. You start at a position of aiming for fairness. Then you only prevent people from competing if a clear advantage can be justified. In other words, the complete opposite of blanket sports bans.

With sports bans, you’re not meeting someone halfway on an issue of great scientific debate. You are simply caving to irrational bigotry. People think trans people are gross, so they want to hurt them. That’s really the root of this. And you can’t compromise with someone that isn’t actually trying to craft good public policy. Two people can compromise on tax rates or the generosity of government benefits. But how do you compromise with someone that just wants to hurt other people? Their desire to hurt others isn’t going to end. They’ll just want more. Compromising with bigots only emboldens them.

This isn’t punishment. It’s murder.

deleted by creator

Exactly! Fair enough if you want to define a planet as “anything big enough to be rounded by self-gravity, but too small to undergo fusion in its core.” But there is no definition of a planet, (or at least one without an arbitrary rule like "planets have to be X km in diameter,) that allows Pluto to be a planet without Ceres also being a planet.

Things need to be paid for, but why does that mechanism need to be baked into the platform?

Imagine I’m the best, most engaging poster and commenter on Lemmy. Everyone loves my posts and comments, shares them, quotes them, and responds to them endlessly. (Maybe in this scenario everyone has brain damage for some reason, and this allowed me to become the top Lemmy user.)

If I’m in that position, what’s stopping me from just putting a little blurb at the bottom of each comment saying, “this post is brought to you by Carls Jr.” or whoever wants to sponsor my comments. If people for some reason loved my posts and comments enough, I could find sponsors and just put those sponsorships right in whatever comment or post I make. Lemmy doesn’t need to be involved. They don’t need to go out of their way to recommend my posts either. If they’re good enough, then they can be spread naturally by people sharing and engaging with them.

It makes sense for platforms to provider revenue to creators, but only if the platform has substantial ad revenue. YouTube pays its creators, but it also brings in billions of ad revenue. I don’t think most Lemmy servers even have ads.

I can’t think of any other nation that has literally been wiped off the map more times than Poland, and still managed to come back again and again. If any country needs nukes, it’s Poland.

It can’t be the ninth planet. It literally can’t. It’s either not a planet, or its the tenth planet.

Well, at least they’re censoring “biological male/female.” Such a stupid phrase.

Yeah, I’m guilty of the same.

The great thing is that you only have to watch junk if you want to watch junk. Even if you confine yourself to free videos on youtube, there’s plenty of good stuff out there. If you curate your subscriptions and browse on the “subscribed” tab, rather than letting the algorithm feed you, you can control your viewing experience fully. You can even set up rss feeds for your subscribed channels if you want. Plus there are no shortage of ad- and sponsor-blocking options out there.

Ultimately, you get the online experience you work for. But it’s certainly possible to curate a stream that is the equivalent or superior to the experience of the Discovery or History Channels back in their heyday, before their enshittification.

Yeah when I see these, I just imagine the corollary. Imagine someone photoshopped Trump into blackface, or just photoshopped to look black. And then they post it and try to defend it saying, “well Trump hates black people, so we’re making fun of him!” While I get that, the joke would still be, “it’s funny because he’s black.” Here, the punchline is, “hah, Vance is trans!”

Conservatives like to say that we can’t have humor anymore, that there are some groups you just can’t make fun of. But that simply isn’t true. You can tell jokes involving trans people. The jokes just shouldn’t be lazy, with the punchline being, “ha, this person is trans!” Trans humor can be done, and done well. Hell, trans people have a better perspective than almost anyone on the complex absurdities society’s relations with gender. There’s a lot of humor to be found there, if you simply look beyond lazy tropes of, “hah, get it, she was trans!”

What’s funny about this?

Trump is a Wish.com Stalin.

And why do you take the word of a man who was infamously one of history’s greatest liars?