• 0 Posts
  • 21 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 12th, 2023

help-circle



  • Lemmy without politics is kinda a ghost board. There is maybe 3 or 4 new posts a day.

    I think your approach of blocking any user who posts about politics is eliminating the most prolific posters when 95% of their stuff is non-political. This is not to say your approach is bad, just that it doesn’t actually represent “Lemmy without politics”.


  • Once you start showing formatting you will also be able to see and delete “Section Breaks” more easily, which brings in another bit of Word deep magic:

    Settings for sections are at the end of the section. If you delete a section break, the previous section will start using the settings of the next section.

    This is especially fun for the last section of the document. If you want it to use the settings from the previous section, you have to manually “copy” the settings by editing the good section and then Redo in the bad section.








  • Oh man, don’t stop

    You got it! Here’s some other consumer protections the administration has introduced recently:

    • Direct filing with the IRS
    • Price limits on asthma inhalers and insulin for seniors
    • Requiring ISPs to provide consistent up-front information and pricing
    • Restrictions on college junk fees and disallowing witholding of transcripts

    Hungry for more? Check this out:

    White House Statement on Junk Fees

    That’s from October, so some of it overlaps, but among other stuff there’s still a “Click to Cancel” rule working its way through the FTC.

    Sadly Biden has been spending a bunch of time on lame crap like climate change, human rights, health care, infrastructure, election integrity, etc., so it might take a bit longer for him to single-handedly usher in consumer utopia.


  • This seems entirely opposite to my observation. I’d say Biden and his administration are unusually focused on unfair or annoying business practices. In just the past two weeks the Biden administration:

    • Set clear rules requiring cash refunds for flight delays
    • Banned non-compete clauses
    • Set new rules on “junk fees” for credit cards
    • Increased the minimum salary for overtime exemption
    • Expanded fiduciary duty to retirement “advisors”
    • Announced a lawsuit against Live Nation (TicketMaster)
    • Re-instated net neutrality





  • So to most effectively address climate change we need individuals to change their behavior. So we can just tell everyone to do that, and we are all set, right? Clearly not. We need to:

    Tax Carbon

    Taxing “carbon” (really all GHG emissions) creates incentives for individuals and companies to use less, making trade-offs and choosing less carbon-intensive products. It moves the threshold for switching over to cleaner and more efficient technologies. People who refuse to acknowledge climate change will still change their behavior for personal benefit. People who want to make the world better will have more options and less reliance on company marketing/greenwashing.

    Read what 28 Nobel Laureates and thousands of other economists have to say: https://clcouncil.org/economists-statement/

    As mentioned on that page, the best use of this tax is to give it back to everyone equally. Those who pollute less than average come out ahead. Those who pollute more pay for it in (indirect) taxes.


  • This is wrong on top of wrong. First off, it’s 57 entities (including “Former Soviet Union”) producing 80% of the emissions tracked by the database – which covers “88% of total fossil fuel and cement emissions,” and totals 251G tonnes of CO2 equivalent gasses (CO2e) from 2016 through 2012 [1]. So with that we have 200Gt making up 70% of the global total over that 7 year period.

    But fossil fuels and cement emissions are not the only source of greenhouse gasses. Human-caused global emissions are roughly 53GtCO2e annually during that time [2], for a total of 370Gt across all sources. So 200Gt is about 54% of that.

    Most importantly though, this is a ridiculous measure in the first place. Who cares how many people are responsible for digging up the fuels that people are directly burning themselves in their homes and cars? If every oil well had its own company, how would that improve emissions? Nearly half of emissions are from individuals, and much of the rest is directly driven by consumer demand (e.g. power companies burning coal and gas).

    Sources