It’s a procedural rule, yes it can be put back in place if Republicans want to, they don’t, but it can be. This is because it has no law associated with it, no bill to pass, it’s something the Senate made up to stall civil rights and especially keep brown senators in the 1800s from doing anything the extreme white minority didn’t want.

It’s not a ‘nuclear option,’ it’s a return to how the country was designed to function and did function for more than a century.

It’s a simple majority vote on the start of a session, Dems have had a simple majority plenty of times

Dems have actively chosen to keep the filibuster despite having multiple opportunities to remove it as a rule.

370 billion, mostly for tax credits that are actively being abused by bad actors, all that don’t address the actual problems. Every house could have solar panels and every car could be an EV and it simply would not be enough to get anywherr near carbon neutrality, much less the needed carbon negative to avoid 2c by 2030.

The reality is China proved it was possible to lower emissions by actual green investment, building more green energy production last year than the total green energy capacity of the US. They’ve hit peak emissions while the US hasn’t. This isn’t meant as a China good thing, to preempt that nonsensical reply, but merely as a direct example of what the US could do given they have similar (though slightly lower) GDP. At this point in time China produces more green energy than the US produces total.

We usually have dedicated baggers in the US, though many stores switched to having the cashier do it due to the ‘labor shortage’ during the pandemic. It’s basically a jobs program, usually given to disabled or older applicants that management wants tax credits for, but don’t actually have a use for; also teens that otherwise would be too costly to train if they’re only being employed for the summer.

Capitalism breeds innovation in how to pretend labor is necessary for everyone to do.

What importance? Neither party is giving up oil subsidies or really investing all that much into green energy, and neither party has even the slightest thought about criminally investigating investors and owners of oil and coal companies for their, and this cannot be overstated, crimes against humanity that top all other crimes ever committed by any arbitrary grouping of people.

The choices are accelerate climating change incredibly quickly via fake carbon capture technology and carbon credit schemes that not only don’t lead to lower total emissions but actually increase emissions, or accelerate even faster by releasing the few regulations we have rregarding the environment.

And that itself is beautiful in its own way. Free self expression from unrecognized, unwanted youth; a shout against a society that has thrown them away.

“the children were Hamas” - literally the defense genocide apologists have used all year.

Graffiti is better than a lot of generic build/paint designs. Cookie cutter modern housing is terrible to look at, but you add a little graffiti and you now have an interesting area.

Yes. The reason it works is racism and classism; and you can use that fact to affect change in the desired direction.

It’s like when a group of black guys have a traditionally white white guy with them to make the cops not bother them as much.

You’re the reason financial literacy needs to be taught in schools. I don’t even support the existence of investing, but you need to look up how index funds work.

If you find yourself on the same side of discussion as a genocide denying fascist, you might want to stop and reexamine your views.

Cool, every part of the government for longer than you’ve been alive has already been doing right wing loyalty tests to all positions. This plan isn’t new, it’s not particularly detailed. I mean the FBI specifically was formed to enforce right wing ideology amongst government workers (and the public at large.)

I suggest you reread that statement and try against, lest you prove the illiteracy of neoliberals.

Project 2025 is no different from the standard Republican policy points for the last hundred years. Dems cheered on and helped try to accomplish the new American century, there’s no reason to think project 2025 will also be watered down to be bipartisan like the policy lists before it.

So prison labor for profit is bad now? When is the EU going to completely sanction the US then?

The first violent Zionist settlers started migrating in the late 1800s, not the 20th century, this is more Zionist propaganda that leaves out the early terror in Palestine that foreshadowed the rest of the conflict. These early terror groups were mostly ineffective, but their eventual dissolution lead to Zionist thought spreading to what are now the top supporters and financiers of Israel. the rest of the comment is spot on though.

Give any animal the ability to photosynthesize. Now animals are of course complex creatures that need a variety of nutrients to function properly, and the number of chemicals we’ve seen be able to be photosynthesized is low, but imagine only needing to nude sunbathe for like a half hour to get enough sugars to fulfill your caloric intake, including the less efficient carb->protein/carb->fat conversion and pop a pill for some vitamins. Imagine if all animals had that as a baseline and just needed to hunt/forage for nutrients and vitamins to support auxillary functions.

Overpopulation would be nearly impossible despite massive population booms, with the only real limitation being physical space and the social dynamics of any given species or interspecies interactions.

Yes greenpeace, the Exxon funded anti-green terrorist organization, spread massive amounts of propaganda written by oil companies, including anti nuclear propaganda.

To your second point, nickel-iron batteries by the 1950s had developed to a point where they could compete with ice vehicles (not that they couldn’t earlier as well) and would have made great electric cars and trucks given they were already the primary power source for trains (just in diesel electric form). EVs as we know them today would have been ubiquitous had Edison not been terrible with technology and science.

With that the primary use for petroleum oil would have been eliminated, and we’d need large amounts of cheap electricity by the 1950s, resulting in nuclear being the cheapest option per kWh.

You might ask why bring up green peace if I’m going a half century earlier to start this alternative history timeline… Because there was a revival of interest in EVs and alternatives to oil in the 1960s and 1970s when greenpeace was active. We could have made the switch then to EVs and nuclear plants to power them. 1970s cars were so inefficient that even the nearly century old at the time nickel iron batteries would have still been able to compete with ice engines.

But if we don’t have nuclear to power them, they’re not the environmentally friendly option in a time before efficient solar and wind power, so oils execs just needed to attack nuclear plants and hey, there just happens to be a group of confused hippies arguing against nuclear arms… If you could tie nuclear power to nuclear weapons and get the peace hippies convinced nuclear power leads to nuclear weapons proliferation and also convince them nuclear disasters are somehow worse than oil disasters (which even at the time was not true, it just felt that way due to biased, sponsored, media coverage) then you can convince the core audience of EVs that it’s not worth investing in that tech or nuclear.

To your point in developing nations, yes they can. Foreign owned and operated nuclear plants are incredibly popular at this time, Germany’s nuclear plants in Brazil being an example of nuclear being deployed to a particularly unstable developing country with minimal issues.

Minimizing uses for oil helps carve a path to eliminate it and other carbon based energy sources. Even if nuclear cannot eliminate all use in its own, it’s a cornerstone technology that enables others to land the killing blow.

It certainly was used as a symbol of Judaism in general, until Israel escalated it’s genocide and started claiming that all Jews globally must support their genocide or they’re not real Jews.

Many Jewish groups, unsurprisingly, fought back against that. Pretty much any Orthodox Jewish community at this point has abandoned the symbol along with the concept of Zionism(since it’s not supported by the Torah in any way), with many less religious communities now also joining in. As it turns out it’s pretty easy to abandon a symbol that was only adopted a century ago in your multi thousand year old religion.

Anyway, anyone wearing a star of David at this point in Israel’s genocide, especially one coloured in blue and white, colours that have nothing todo with the symbol outside the context of a zionist Israel, is a Zionist actively wanting to broadcast their support for Israel and it’s actions.

Any restaurant that features themes of the region but isn’t itself owned by Zionists would want to ensure no one with, especially a blue and white, star of David is on their premises; the same way a Bavarian grill outside of Germany in the 1940s would desperately not want to accept anyone with a fasces, eagle, or swastika on their clothing entering their property – despite the former two being long time German symbols.