https://investors.yum.com/news-events/financial-releases/news-details/2023/Yum-Brands-Reports-Fourth-Quarter-Results-and-Increases-Dividend/default.aspx

We repurchased 10 million shares totaling $1.2 billion at an average price per share of $119.

They are just greedy. They have the money, but giving the money to the rich is evidently more important.

https://cwa-union.org/stock-buybacks-hurt-workers

What holds youtube from blocking all videos to addblock users just as other sites do?

It’s a constant game of cat and mouse, an arms race till the end of time. You can’t block videos from ad-block users if you can’t tell which users are using adblock and which are not.

I don’t understand why self hosted videos aren’t more popular

It’s quite complicated technologically, and requires quite a lot of storage space. Viewers only go where the creators go, and the creators have no reason to go to someplace that is more of a pain in the ass to host videos.

Can you answer my question or not?

Are you referring to your question about my ideals or values, respecting distribution of benefit from land usage?

I’m referring to this one:

ideal that land is natural and should benefit everyone equally.

Do you disagree with this?

I have framed the conversation around my skepticism that Georgism meaningfully contributes to leftism or functions as a leftist tendency

The goal of leftism is to create a better, more progressive society. With that means that the “end goal” of the state must be determined, which means the income, whether monetary/resource based/etc must be determined as well.

You can’t have a state that doesn’t have a defined input/output. So if you want to meaningfully contribute to an ideal leftist society/government, one such meaningful contribution is solving the government’s input/output problem.

Taxing land is one such solution to this problem.

including lands, being utilized socially and also toward benefit that is private.

Under georgism, all land gets taxed regardless of who owns the land, how they own the land, whether it is private or personal, and regardless of whether or not private property still exists.

If you’re not going to answer my questions that I don’t see the need to respond to your statements.

Georgism tends not to augment leftist theory or objectives

And like I already said, not every policy is implemented to solve every problem.

Georgians want landlords and business owners to be taxed such that …

And this is a sweeping generalization. Not all georgians agree on every aspect of georgism. There are georgians that want to keep a pure “free market” capitalism, there are those that want a mixed economy, and those that want socialism or communism in addition to georgism.

It’s not a one size fits all camp.

ideal that land is natural and should benefit everyone equally.

Do you disagree with this?

Leftists want to abolish profit

This is also just a sweeping generalization. Just as with georgism, leftism isn’t something that can be defined by a simplified, sweeping generalization. Leftists are a diverse group.

You’re not talking about policy, which is where the actual conversation is at.

Not every policy is implemented to solve every problem. So listing all the things georgism doesn’t solve is a moot point.

No matter what, the state needs a source of income. And georgism is to my knowledge the least bad of all options, all of which are bad.

The rules on who can own what land for what purpose, private or personal is independent of the rules on how tax is collected.

Shit like that is also a far, far better use of airspace/resources

It’s not even just that people don’t know about the green party, it’s that we are stuck with a voting system that is inherently biased against 3rd parties being viable.

If we can switch to a better voting system like STAR or approval, it would be far better for the green party.

And the existing parties would have to compete for once, which would go a long way towards making them not dumpster fires.

https://www.grammarly.com/blog/simile/

None of us should ever have to go back. We need to vote them out of office like our lives depend on it. Because they very much may be if the right wing decides to go full Gilead.

I agree, which is why I usually bring up both when it makes sense to do so.

At least with a knife, you can’t mow down a room full of people. Here in the U.S. dozens of people can be killed in a short time by a single person due to guns. We give them out like candy.

Both access to guns (force multiplier) and the underlying issue (poverty, lack of social mobility, etc) need to be addressed.

It’s not a perfect replacement, and I never claimed as such. But for most people’s needs, gimp is perfectly capable.

That, and Gimp is quite a capable photo editing tool.

Homelander is the type to side with oil.

it reads like whataboutism.

If you have problems with me saying ‘Isreal’s crimes are wrong’ without clarification about Hamas being bad as well then you should have first had problems with the guy saying “Hamas attacked Israel in the bloodiest assault in history”, implying everything Isreal is doing is morally permissible.

They clearly have a regard for civilian casualties.

People who bomb civilian areas do not care about civilians casualties.

And you inserted your own pro-Hamas

Saying that Isreal shouldn’t be killing civilians and doing ethnic cleansing is not pro-Hamas.

Neither party should be doing those things.

You can be against the Israeli government’s war crimes AND against Hamas’ war crimes.

I am.

Try it, having principals instead of an agenda is freeing and might feel good to you.

Perhaps you could try not assuming the worst out of people you don’t know.

When I say “indiscriminate” I mean “disregard for civilian casualties” not “random bombings”.