That dream would quickly turn into a nightmare after the resultant inflation drives the election of climate denying fascists around the globe who would jail said climate activists and clamp down on any climate action.

Impunity is the word that comes to mind.

The more I read into some parts of the 20th century history the more instances I find. Most conspiracy theories are bullshit, but the footprints of anti-left interference are plenty.

That’s when a dehumanized other comes in handy.

Seems like there’s truth to that:

Following the eruption of the Korean War, US President Harry S. Truman dispatched the United States Seventh Fleet into the Taiwan Strait to prevent hostilities between the ROC and the PRC. The United States also passed the Sino-American Mutual Defense Treaty and the Formosa Resolution of 1955, granting substantial foreign aid to the KMT regime between 1951 and 1965. The US foreign aid stabilized prices in Taiwan by 1952. The KMT government instituted many laws and land reforms that it had never effectively enacted on mainland China. Economic development was encouraged by American aid and programs such as the Joint Commission on Rural Reconstruction, which turned the agricultural sector into the basis for later growth. Under the combined stimulus of the land reform and the agricultural development programs, agricultural production increased at an average annual rate of 4 percent from 1952 to 1959. The government also implemented a policy of import substitution industrialization, attempting to produce imported goods domestically. The policy promoted the development of textile, food, and other labor-intensive industries.

From: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taiwan?wprov=sfla1

Something I stumbled upon while reading about this party:

From the 1950s to the early 1970s, the United States Central Intelligence Agency spent millions of dollars to aid the LDP against leftist parties such as the Socialists and the Communists, although this was not revealed until the mid-1990s when it was exposed by The New York Times. Details remain classified, while available documents show connections to prime ministers Nobusuke Kishi and Eisaku Satō from the Satō–Kishi–Abe family.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_Democratic_Party_(Japan)?wprov=sfla1

Yeah this is really sus.

Thanks! I’ve been running 5x16T from SPD for over 6 months with zero issues.

Same.

Did they think that about Telegram? I thought it was quite popular despite that.

Every time I hear SimpleX I think of herpes. Perhaps shows that whoever came up with that name had never had or looked up cold sores.😂

How’s that ruining its reputation?

That pesky phone number requirement saves the day again.

Again, a sovereign currency issuer doesn’t need foreign or private financial capital. It can create it at will. It only needs the real people and resources needed to do the work that it wants to do. If it’s got the labor, knowhow and materials, it can just print the money and get that economic activity started. Especially if it doesn’t need to import anything.

He can turn a significant chunk of this value into actual dollars, even without selling the stock. This line of reasoning that execs’ worth is not what it seems to be because it’s based on share value is constantly used to discount their wealth and argue against acting on wealth inequality.

for a budget device

Not less important. At this sort of lifespan the availability of parts becomes an important question.

Unless Iran can pull a nuke out of a hat this Wednesday.

Stein summed it up, saying, “An American official said, ‘If you don’t hit targets A, B, C, we will provide you with diplomatic protection and an arms package.’”

“Israeli officials responded saying, ‘We consider the United States and listen to them. But we will do anything and everything we can to protect the citizens and the security of the State of Israel.’”

Jesus fucking Christ

I think you hit the nail on the head. More and more I think this is exactly the problem. Carbon taxes especially become a problem when the individual has no good alternatives to switch to. One obvious example is commuting by car and public transit. People should feel encouraged to switch to public transit by the policy. Except public transit is so inadequate in most of Canada that it’s simply not a realistic option for many if not most. If you’re an individual in that situation, you’d feel the carbon tax is just punishing you with no action you can take to make it stop. The only lever left to them is the democratic lever and they’re gonna pull it to make it stop. I think you’re right that the focus of the carbon tax should be on industry alone. Companies are much more likely to have ability to do something about their carbon output as well as to be able to act rationally on price signals. In order to address individual-level emissions, other policies should be employed. Create alternative first, then make them irresistible. Build massive public transit then make it cheap to use, procure large supply of heat pumps then subsidise exchanging gas furnaces for them.

Oh and when economists call it the most efficient way to curb climate change, they are talking specifically about economic efficiency. Its political externalities aren’t factored in even if they are large enough to kill the policy itself.

Okay but it does seem odd to claim it’s unpopular when the unpopularity is based on misunderstanding.

I don’t think it’s odd, because people vote based on whatever their understanding or misunderstanding is. Therefore this popularity is what drives upstream decisions on keeping, modifying or repealing this policy. Not what the true, factual reality is.

Obamacare

I don’t have the numbers on Obamacare but lets assume for sake of argument that 80% of people wanted it repealed, while only 20% if it was called ACA. If at a given point in time the law was referred to by Obamacare by 80% of the people and they wanted it repealed, then I’d say it’s unpopular. Of course I can see how this applies to the CT and I’d refer you to my previous paragraph. People will vote and demand change on the basis of their current beliefs, however well they match reality. If someone managed to manufacture belief one way or another, that’s what counts at the ballot box. Today I think the beliefs on CT can’t be framed as popular. Worse, I think they shouldn’t be framed this way because it could lead to counterproductive results.