You do realize that if we invest in more mass transit, then the people who want to take the bus will. That means fewer cars on the road and less traffic that you have to deal with. If you like driving your car and the freedom it gives you, advocating for more mass transit is in your favor. Imagine your commute with 90% less traffic. Doesn’t that sound appealing to you? Dedicated bus lanes that keep the slow busses out of your lane, doesn’t that sound appealing to you? I don’t know about you, but I love driving, and to me, that sounds like an absolute win

They are saying we need to target where the debt comes from not that we need to bend a knee to the billionaires.

We do use fractional reserve banking whether its a great system or not and so to not trigger a depression or recession we need to be aware of not triggering a deflationary period which would occur by having a surplus in the budget. Instead of excess spending on military we should be investing/spending excess in public infrastructure like health care, mass transportation, and education which have means of generating wealth beyond resource extraction from other nations during war.

They are saying this is a two pronged issue, we need to tax the billionaires but we also need to make sure we still target the right critical investments of public infrastructure with our government spending if we are to see any benefit from it. Otherwise we end in a deflationary period where while you did tax the rich you also delfated the currency making each dollar worth more. I.e they become millionaires in name with the same value as the billionaires they were before all while wages become depressed and the wealth gap gets even worse.

Honestly daily charging isn’t the worst I just usually charge my watch when I’m in the shower and getting ready in the morning pop it back on when I’m done and I’m good to go.

It takes a few minutes to add constructive critism and point out where engery is better spent. We need decisive actions that apply the correct pressure at the correct areas if you want to see this cause material change fast as we need it. Read my other comment for how this could actually be achieved. Long story short organizing general strikes in areas where politicians and the uber wealthy aggregate effecting the luxuries they constantly are afforded and stopping the system for them could create more effect while not needing to try and get the whole country to mobilize but localized towns. Donations to local urban farms and small farms to create sustainable food sources if we were to have a general strike. Teaming up with medical providers to shut down hospitals and the like for politicians and the uber wealthy while creating popup clinics to support the locals in the areas these strikes happen would create enormous pressure without needing to try and mobilize the whole of the country.

Where did I ever state that I didn’t participate? You are allowed to critique efforts and add constructive ways to improve these efforts. This particular goal is limited in where it has effect a better effect would be organizing general strikes. Donate to setup food banks with local growers, this way we have supplies that don’t rely on going to stores for food. Organize members to start a general strike. Do it first in captial rich areas, you don’t need to shut down your small local town but the areas where politicians and the uber wealthy aggregate. Come with supplies to help these people be able to shut down general services. Get support from small town doctors to set up popup clinics in the areas where these strikes will happen so the locals arent shit out of luck but turn down the rich and political class. This then puts pressure on those who need to feel it. And that would work better than boycotting amazon for a couple days when the cash cow for these companies really holding our society by the balls are data centers and cloud computing services. You don’t need the whole country participating in a strike you need to be strategic and apply pressure where it’s felt. Point blank that’s what will have a tangible effect and quickly.

Not everything is black and white. Sure, it’s easier when you can label everyone an enemy or friend. That’s why the extreme right acts in the manner of ingroup and outgroups. There are people who hate, people who are disillusioned, people who have been misguided, people who have disorders, people who prefer inaction, people who prefer reaction, people who prefer change, people who prefer no change, etc. Some share values with you others do not. To quote jcole, “fuck is the point of preaching your message to those that already believe what you believe” if you want to see change you need to start figuring out the underlying reasons those on the other side believe what they believe. That will allow you to figure out how to combat those illusions that lead them off track. The uncomfortable truth is that you are more like them then you think, just because you came from an environment which allowed you the privilege to see past the bullshit doesn’t mean had you grown up in their environment you wouldn’t be just as lost as them.

Hate drives engagement and can have multiple intersections with opposing view points. Take our algorithmic methods of serving content and you get silos of positivity with oceans of hate in between that fuel metrics of user engagement and view time. Drive your share price by those metrics and run the economy on those share prices. Viola hate becomes the new most important resource to generate and those who can spread it most effectively or direct that hate become those with the most power. If we want to break that grasp on power we need to break the cycle of engagement being tied to hate, find a way to drive engagement through positive action and understanding. I talk like I know how to do that but in reality that’s one of the most difficult problems humanity has in general. Like greed is terrible but if you could figure out how to make positivity and mutual understanding more profitable than spewing hate and divisiveness you could channel those at the tops greed into positive feedback loops. Once you have more understanding, and equity in individuals understanding each other we can them finally work as a collective to start eliminating things like bigotry, poverty, etc.

It makes me think this is more of an effort to get people to feel apathetic. Get them trying to do something that they thought might create change but had no real material effect. What we need is a general strike if we want them to take notice. No garbage man cleaning the trash, no janitor cleaning the shit stains in their executive office, no valet making them park themselves, no drivers to drive their drunk coked up asses around, no cooks to prep their meals, no assistant reminding them they can’t keep track of their head without the people they try and fuck on a daily basis. That is something that even just a day would have them shitting bricks, and with no one to clean up for them, they would have to fester in the shit show they have made. That’s the only way we get them to take notice and realize the masses are serious about change.

I don’t knock the fact that things need to be done, but a general strike would be more effective if you want them to notice what an economic blackout would look and feel like. No company is looking at profits at a one day scale, so point blank, no one up top is going to see any effect from this. The fact people are still going to get what they need, but just on a different day means the only ones who noticed this or were affected by it were the ones who participated not the rich fucks getting paid tomorrow instead of today. We need to work towards tangible goals that have something that can be measured and affect real change, not cause more people to feel apethic when their efforts go unrewarded.

Maybe increase the pay so they aren’t searching for another job when they are forced to retire at 56 without training for another career. And also decrease hours needed to work per week to account for the additional stress they face so they can recoup. You would surely have more people applying when taking these factors into account.

Sounds like they need to increase pay and reduce the number of hours worked while still getting a salary and benfits to entice more people to the position and make the stress more bearable for those they can get to fill the position. It’s not a matter of how many people are qualified it’s a matter of how many people want to make the tradeoffs to work there and be upskilled to meet the requirements. If your deal is not enticing enough, you need to restructure how the position works in order to entice more people for the position.