Just wanted to toss in Star Voting as an alternative I was just informed about yesterday. Seems to be more RCV than RCV.

The fact that this is being censored across much of social media is interesting. I think more interesting than what’s in the document itself.

First I’m hearing of this. I’ll look into it.

I still find the whole bottled water thing odd. I remember a time when there was just Poland Spring and Deer Park and you only bought a bottle of water if you were absolutely dying. From my vantage point, it seems like consumerism, across the board, has skyrocketed in the past 20 years.

I was just having conversation with a fellow Gen Xer about how people just don’t know how or don’t care to do things for themselves anymore. As I look at all the subscriptions and consumer goods and delivery services that make headlines, it seems like we, as a culture, are spending a lot more money on what used to be called luxury expenses.

Some people legitimately have bad municipal water. They need to put pressure on their civic leaders to fix their gross negligence. For most other people, I would really recommend a filter system you can install either at the source of your water, under your kitchen sink, or in a pitcher in your fridge.

It’s worth noting that even the aluminum water bottles (Stanley, etc.) come with some health concerns. If you’re getting something from China, I’ve heard their manufacturing and raw material quality control isn’t up to US standards. Regardless, most if not all aluminum water bottles have a plastic liner. Your best bet is glass. If you have an aluminum bottle, don’t use it for hot liquids and try to keep it out of the sunlight for too long.

Although they’re a bit better than plastic bottles, all aluminum cans require a plastic inner liner.

https://www.plasticstoday.com/business/liquid-death-may-murder-your-thirst-but-it-won-t-kill-plastic-no-matter-what-the-ads-say

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W05yBVq18cY

Cool. Can we also get moving on Ranked Choice Voting?

You’re tripling down on this? This is the hill you want to die on?

Do you think a grocer would stock 18 eggs next to 12 eggs without any clear indication until you took it off the top shelf? Or do you think they’d stack it differently, on a lower shelf, so you could easy discern the difference?

What the fuck does this have to do with the fucking point of this story? You want to argue over a fucking dollar? That’s important to you?

I would like to see more investment in informative media. Social media has been one of the best sources to get information about local events, news, and alerts.

Speaking from an American’s perspective, I would like to see federated networks organized similarly to the United States. There should be one main federal instance, then a sub instance for states, eventually down to micro instances for neighborhoods or zip codes.

My complaint about “corporate social media” has been its need to make money from advertising driven by engagement. This means I miss tons of posted information by family, friends, businesses, bands, restaurants, record shops, farmers markets, city council members, police departments, reporters, etc.

I still want to connect with these users but getting them on board with the fediverse is an uphill battle if they’re only in it for the memes. Creating a platform that makes some tangible sense to people, I think, would drive more adoption. If you want to connect with your city, join cityname.state.US.verse. This wouldn’t exclude the creation of other networks like I dunno… nestle.corp.verse or tiktok.social.verse.

Ok. Simple observation of the image would inform you that you’re wrong. I’m not sure how one person can say the sky is blue and the other look at the same sky and claim it’s “obviously red”.

I wasn’t insulting you. I was speaking generally about the internet’s strange insistence to focus on pointless semantics for the sake of pride. Although, this conversation informs me that maybe there is some elementary education left to discuss among grown adults. I’m going to do us both the favor and assume you’re trolling me.

You’re twisting the reality you’ve already twisted to continue to fit your narrative. I will not follow you down that rabbit hole.

If you’d like to discuss the real story, the “inflation explosion act” and even the lack of policy proposals by the Trump campaign (to my knowledge) to reduce the costs of goods, I’d be happy to do so.

I fail to see how that is relevant at all. He could be holding a steak or a roll of paper towels standing in front of bananas or at a car dealership and speak about the cost of a dozen eggs.

What is relevant is his claim that “Harris’ inflationary policies” had an impact on the price of items at grocery stores. This is untrue.

I think I get it. The internet wants to call out every detail in an image as if they’re true crime detectives. They want to be more right than everyone else. But only based on the most simple piece of content possible. If it requires reading a few paragraphs, or finding your own source material that a news outlet fails to provide, or using a middle school degree of reading / listening comprehension that’s too much work. I did that here, and hate that it needed to be done, to back up my previous comments elsewhere in this thread.

Now a dozen eggs will cost you around $4.

Right there.

So, now you want to ignore the signs behind him and use statistics for the country?

Just stop. You are not contributing to any valuable discourse.

Strong agree. I think most people just go for the low hanging fruit because they don’t actually care enough to be invested in policy. The vast majority of “news” is just trash to generate clicks and engagement and we all suck it up like calorie-free frappaccinos.

I posted earlier in response to his full comment regarding the “inflation explosion act”. This is something worth reading about - that the Inflation Reduction Act has not had any immediate impact on inflation to date (up or down). Others here have accurately commented about the disease spreading across poultry farms which has most impacted the costs of eggs in particular.

It’s also worth pointing out that bird flu is increasingly having an impact on cattle. https://arstechnica.com/science/2024/09/bird-flu-is-spreading-rapidly-in-california-infected-herds-double-over-weekend/ So, expect dairy prices to slowly and steadily increase.

Evidence has been presented to you which you are ignoring for the sake of your own narrative. You are so obsessed with your political agenda that you can not admit that your “opponent” might be right for once. The average price of the eggs he is standing in front of is $4.10. Vances’ statement about the price of eggs is 100% accurate.

Regardless, the story is not about the price of eggs. The story is about a political candidate making remarks about policy which may or may not have impacted the price of eggs and other consumer goods. These specific remarks are a mixed bag as the price of eggs are impacted more by disease and the price of other goods were not impacted by the Inflation Reduction Act.

I don’t understand how people are so blinded by their politics that they twist reality to turn the truth into fiction. You are disseminating “fake news” and deepening the divide between us.

This is exactly what’s wrong with us. When one side makes a claim that the other side sees very clearly to be false then we attack each other over something (a meme) that’s whole irrelevant to our lives. We should be discussing inflation. Because clearly, not enough people have a clue about how it works. We should be discussing this candidates claim that an Act of Congress caused the price of consumer goods to increase. Is that true or is it not? What is it that this administration has actually done?

This is what should guide us at the polls and in our political discourse, not if a quick glance at the price of eggs in one store in one part of one state is accurate to the dollar or not.

Quote: “now a dozen eggs will cost you around four dollars thanks to Kamala Harris’ inflationary policies”.
Checks source: Average cost $4.10.

Edit: I’ve updated this post to reflect the point of it being posted in News.

The problem? When footage of the visit emerged, Vance was quickly called out by viewers who spotted the price tag of a dozen eggs behind him was actually $2.99.

– Vance is being called out for saying eggs cost around $4 while standing in front of eggs that costs $3 when in fact the average cost for eggs he is standing in front of is $4.10.

I hate that this is the bullshit we spend our time arguing over.

I edited my comment with an image of the source since you didn’t care to look for yourself.

How did you get to that part while ignoring the preceding sentence?

Here’s a link to the video I presume this trash article is referring to https://x.com/TrumpWarRoom/status/1837581418329002260 You can see, like every grocery store I’ve ever been to, a number of different prices for eggs, including at least three for $4.99 and one for $3.99.

Every store has eggs tagged at different prices depending on what kind they are. If you look quickly and see more signs that start with $4 than $2, would you say eggs are $2.99 or “around $4”?

I’m really amazed at the ignorance, be it willful or not, all Americans are capable of.

I mean… all you had to do was look.

Awesome. Thank you for that!!

This story is absolutely trash. Here’s a link to the video I presume this trash article is referring to https://x.com/TrumpWarRoom/status/1837581418329002260 You can see, like every grocery store I’ve ever been to, a number of different prices for eggs, including at least three for $4.99 and one for $3.99.

EDIT: Here’s the photo op since some people prefer to comment on headlines rather than source material.
The average price of visible price tags is $4.10. Though I still argue that the literal price tag on these eggs is far from the relevant point of his words. Arguing over the average value in the background of an image is wholly irrelevant to a politician making claims about policy.

The take away from this video shouldn’t be hurdur the tag says $2.99 but the discussion of his claim about “Kamala Harris’ inflationary policies” and “because she cast a deciding vote on the Inflation Explosion Act”. At least, that’s what a reputably news organization would give a shit about discussing.

This article from PBS quotes Alex Arnon, an economic and budget analyst for the University of Pennsylvania’s Penn Wharton Budget Model, “We can say with pretty strong confidence that it was mostly other factors that have brought inflation down,’’ he said. “The IRA has just not been a significant factor.’’

This bit from Wiki says “the benefits of the Act will likely not be felt before the 2024 election, but that the Act is a great long-term strategy to decouple from volatile energy markets that drive inflation and that the Act will reduce inflation over the medium to long-term.”

The Inflation Reduction Act actually had very little to do with inflation or the price of eggs. The price of eggs has been mostly dictated by disease and the need to slaughter millions of birds.

Moreover, I understand the (under/misinformed) complaint people have about rising egg prices as it pertains to kitchen table economics. However, from the perspective of what we’re putting into our bodies and paying people a fair wage to do honest work, we should be complaining that eggs are too cheap.

Of all things, it continues to shock me how inexpensive eggs are. I’ve been paying $5-$7 for a dozen eggs from local producers for about ten years. They’re noticeably more delicious, it’s less impactful to the environment, the chickens are far less prone to disease, I assume the chickens are healthier and have a better diet, my dollars go towards a local economy not some billion dollar corporation on the other side of the country.

Trumpism

is different than Trump the president.

The presidential actions taken by President Reagan are different than the choices Americans are making to endorse and follow Trump. It’s the actions Reagan took as president that have in large part brainwashed the public and created the environment where people are flocking towards people like Trump.

Trump the president is a symptom of the problems created by Reagan, Stone, Cheney, and the Heritage Foundation. Trump the brand is the epitome of Reaganomics and corporatocracy.

Reagan set the seeds for dismantling our trust in government and putting it into corporations and celebrities. Reagan (the actor?!) is the prime modern-time example of the people ignoring politics in favor of celebrity.

I would argue that Reagan’s influence and GOP brainwashing far surpasses Trump’s to the point that the vast majority of people in this country are wholly unaware of its existence. Though, yes, the extremism that Trumpism has fostered is certainly more dangerous to the public and democracy. I just don’t blame Trump for all of it. America chose to elect him president for a reason. I believe that has more to do with Reagan than with Trump.