ovrhere_

ovrhere_ t1_ixh4mpk wrote

The intention is nice but prayers aren't gonna help us. Unequivocal and persistent condemnation of Walsh, Libs of Tiktok, Carlson, etc; straight/cis people learning the actual social science related to gender (and perhaps even exploring their own) and not just relying on what they think they remember from grade school biology, and of course; help your queer and especially trans friends get armed and learn how to defend themselves correctly. We're being murdered for existing, act accordingly.

7

ovrhere_ t1_iwue69y wrote

Conspicuous consumption is a phrase I'm not familiar with so i looked it up and i don't understand what you're asking. Guaranteeing every resident has utilities regardless of their income feels to me like the opposite of purchasing goods or services to publicly display wealth rather than to cover basic needs, I'm suggesting the state should cover those needs universally. And yeah that could require higher taxes. I'm not opposed to paying a proportionately higher tax to support that.

−2

ovrhere_ t1_ivzoxbd wrote

I kinda wonder how much they matter in the first place tbh. Like, does prevalence of one candidate's signs over the other really affect people's voting habits?

37