KⒶMⒶLⒶ WⒶLZ 2Ⓐ24

it’s intentionally vague. build an affinity group and assess your capabilities.

your assertion isn’t that inheritances exist, but that removing billionaires will result in more billionaires continuing the destruction of the planet. there is no evidence for this, since billionaire removal has not been tested.

ok well if you don’t have any evidence I’m going to dismiss your conclusion.

I didn’t say they are. but these options are not effective.

not according to the fao

all of agriculture is only about 20%. animal agriculture is a subset of that. don’t lie

please run the experiment with a sufficient sample size and let me know the results.

i didn’t think you were, I’m lampooning people who think their thimble is meaningful.

if everyone who disagree with you is a bot, you must live in a lonely world.

prove that another billionaire would take their place. this is a serious hypothesis that we can test, but the conclusion is not foregone.

someone else might also have a thimble! then you two can feel smug together.

you don’t seem to know what direct means.

you have no idea what I do, but I guarantee that you can stop purchasing everything on that list, you could die and never purchase any of it again, and the powerful interests responsible for the destruction of the environment will continue to grow.

prove it

“tragedy if the Commons” is a capitalist myth, just like consumer activism.

no, they’re not. how about direct action instead of consumer choices?

show me reports I have made.

they do care who wins. they want to be the ones to win

perfect

duverger is undisprovable.