All that, and you may have left out the most damaging of all… Trump will likely pull the US out of Copenhagen, leaving no chance of limiting temps below 2C let alone getting anywhere near 1.5C. The excess deaths from this will likely dwarf COVID.

https://youtu.be/_loUDS4c3Cs?si=3voDpwaDOHr9UIsi This one?

Still my favourite game of all time, so it didn’t really spring to mind for ‘underrated’ games. Pleasing to see it mentioned all the same.

My concern with this line of argument is that it bundles consequences from a system of government up with the consequences of trade embargoes and other hostile actions from capitalist economies. That doesn’t make the actions of the dictators in those countries justifiable in any way, but might have precipitated conditions that made them more likely.

How would communist nations have fared if the US had taken a ‘live and let live’ approach to them? The approach during the cold war was that they couldn’t be allowed to succeed. That led to the sort of standards of living where dictatorship tends to thrive. Note this isn’t unique to communist countries. Look at the Republican party in the US, now that Neoliberalism is failing.

The point seems to have gone quite a long way over your head. The person above is advocating for a system where transit/active travel is the easy option. Not one where you have to up your commute by 500% to do the right thing.

It’s not, “just use transit”, it’s “please make it easier to do so”.

I was certain this link would already be here! https://www.theverge.com/2024/4/2/24117976/best-printer-2024-home-use-office-use-labels-school-homework

It’s up to you. You could add context to those concerns, you could tweak the phrasing, you could undertake a heroic quest to reclaim the phrase if you want.

I’m just adding some context as to why some people react to the phrase.

Using the phrase ‘valid concerns about immigration’ today is a little bit like waving a St. George’s cross in the 80’s though. I mean, it can be done with the purest of intentions, but you’re using a symbol that people (taking you at your read) you’d rather not be associated with use to identify each other.

The sat 24 IR view doesn’t seem to match up very well with what you’ve posted, so it may just be noise, or a corrupted data load.

Does nobody else find the framing of this article a little weird? I thought the argument for boosting the economy, was because it correlated well with people’s well being. (Not that I personally but that, but I understand the line of thought). Now instead we’re suggesting that human outcomes are important because it boosts an arbitrary measure? I feel like the cart is now dragging the horse along the ground.