That is like the weirdest attempt at an argument I’ve ever heard. Somehow we have to make even this stupid fucking discussion about trans people and bathrooms bc apparently that is all some people obsess about. JFC.

Do you let every stranger that asks to use your bathroom, use your bathroom? No.

Do you let people who are guests in your house use your bathroom? Yes.

Would a customer be the equivalent of a guest in a business? Yes.

Do you consider trans people to be humans like anyone else? Yes.

Simple. Mind fucking blown. 🤯

Omgaaaauuuuhghhd bruuuhhh, one group was shitty and wouldn’t take a firm stance against Israel bc they didn’t have a fucking backbone. They’re shitty people that need to step down. They are not essentially the same.

The group you’re comparing them to:

•has said they wanted to bomb Gaza into oblivion and build a resort.

•are currently snatching students who attended pro-palestenian protests off of U.S. streets and shipping them to detention centers hundreds of miles away, (these detention centers are located in my own state in the desolate middle of nowhere, where even lawyers are afraid to even go protest because of threats of harm or being disappeared)

•are dismantling 3 civil rights offices for getting in the way of their immigration policies, one exists to provide benefits to refugees, one that exists to investigate claims of inhumane treatment in those detention center, and the third isn’t even focused on immigration, it exists to protect civil rights and liberties for all Americans dealing with DHS agencies and had to be created after the patriot act was passed by Republicans following 9/11 and too many rights were being violated

•have repeatedly openly ignored and publicly joked about just tossing due process, which is a constitutional right that anyone in this country is supposed to be entitled to, regardless of citizenship. When asked a little over a week ago if he needed to uphold the constitution, Trump said he didn’t know. Not like a joke. He really didn’t know if that was something he would be expected to comply with as president, as long as his lawyers told him he could ignore it.

Not sure if you actually read that, but the modern Republican vs Democrat political parties have very likely been intentionally polarized and turned into what they are today because of the Heritage Foundation, in order to destroy democracy and create an oligarchy.

I am not a fan of the DNC, but again it’s blatantly false to claim the actions of shitty individuals in the DNC are representative of all liberal values. Calling them slightly more benevolent when in power is either an extremely misinformed opinion or a blatant attempt to spread disinformation.

Over the last 4 months (starting literally on Jan 21) I have personally watched the polarized GOP take a literal sledgehammer to publicly funded programs in science and healthcare that (while imperfect) did an extraordinary amount of good for everyday Americans. The amount of damage done to individuals in my state who were dependent on Medicaid (some were patients in the free clinic where I volunteer and some were my own family members) is appalling and inexcusable.

I hope anyone that reads your comment will not be misinformed. I’m sorry if it wasn’t your intention, but (even putting aside losing my own job in science) this is something I’ve watched unnecessarily hurt so many people around me, as healthcare systems begin to ramp down acceptance of Medicaid in preparation for cuts that the Republicans said over and over weren’t going to happen. That was bullshit, and your description, is bullshit.

An imperfect system of very basic benefits is being made even worse in order to justify a tax cut (in addition to the billions that were already stolen via “DOGE” savings) for people who already take so much, and don’t contribute their fair share to society while leeching off corporate welfare and accusing people relying on those benefits of being the leeches. “Slightly more benevolent,” is an ignorant and dangerous way to describe imperfect but expanded access to healthcare vs the the passive aggressive genocide of undesirable populations through Mediciad cuts that are only necessary to benefit the wealthy who have taken so much more than what they have contributed.

I don’t have time to argue bc I have to go to my publicly funded job soon that’s about to be gone because of Republicans, but as a civil libertarian I can tell you that’s a completely BS argument.

If you’d like to read about privatized corporate government maybe check out this information on the Heritage Foundation and their role creating a “free market” in post Soviet Russia

Here you go:

Here is some info about the Heritage Foundation and the first go-between for US and Russia businesses

Here is some information about how right-wing billionaire Peter Thiel has been involved in Trump’s privatization of unethical AI since at least 2017

It seems like a lot of the stuff being blamed on Elon Musk was actually Theil’s idea, he was just smart enough to be quiet about it and let Elon be the face of taking a chainsaw to government bureaucracy (and consequently any publicly funded goods and services).

Exactly, I feel like this is kind of a BS argument made by the right to say this is why liberal values are fake vs on the flip side they would be showing a wrecked bathroom in a private business to prove why liberals are suckers and liberalism is unsustainable. Like “This is what liberals want for America.”

In reality most liberals just want you to fairly tax that business and property owners and use those tax dollars to reinvest in the community by building and maintain public restrooms and other public spaces… It’s really not rocket science.

Nobody could reasonably argue it’s on you to provide public access to the bathroom in your home, why would it be different for a business? Guests/customers are one thing, but liberalism is not arguing it’s on you as an individual to take care of society.

It’s on society to take care of people, and on you to contribute to and reinvest in society as in individual to be part of something greater than just yourself.

Why should a private business be anymore responsible for providing a public restroom than you should be for offering a restroom to the public vs reserving it for yourself and guests in your home?

If you pay taxes it should be on the government or local community to provide public availability to restrooms that are maintained with the tax dollars you and people in your community pay.

Why is it on a liberal private business owner to provide a public bathroom? This just seems like the myth people use to show why liberalism is either phony or unsustainable.

It should be on the local government/community to provide public options.

Ok so I keep telling people if nothing else good comes from this shit year, 2025 was the year I learned to appreciate the value of a good home made soup. So, I am so excited to see this post!

I use vegetable better than bullion base, chop a big club of ginger in a food processor then add it to the base, add in 2-3 jalapenos, key lime juice, and Sriracha

While all that’s simmering, I sautee red onion, broccoli, and shrimp, then add all that to the soup and let it simmer together for a while. Sometimes I’ll add tofu. Usually eat that for a few days. It’s awesome especially when you’re sick.

Thank you for your reply!

Again, I am sorry if my understanding is way off base. So the house of Lords are all elected, and and peers are selected by elected members?

How much sway do individual peers currently have?

I’m not sure if a good U.S. comparison (if one exists) to peers needing to be vetted would be similar to U.S. lobbyists or if peers have more direct roles in law making, similar positions that individuals in the U.S. are nominated for (such as Kratsios’ OSTP nomination), which then has to be approved by the Senate.

In the case of U.S. nominees for executive positions, they are supposed to be vetted by bipartisan committees of elected senators that will not pass them on to be nominated by the entire Senate if they are not fit to serve those positions. It’s supposed to act like a safeguard, because once fitness is approved by those committees, it would basically take an act of God (for some reason) to keep the main Senate vote from approving the nomination. While I think it’s a good thing those committees exist, they also fail horribly to do what they’re actually supposed to do.

This U.S. election in particular has shown us what a joke that entire process is, and not only resulted in approval of Kratsios’ nomination by a Senate committee which s supposed to make decisions for U.S. science (only 4 of 13 Democrats bothered to object to his fitness), it has also resulted in several other individuals being approved who are clearly unfit for their roles. Such as RFK Jr., who is famous for his anti-vax and anti-science rhetoric, being approved by another committee for our secretary of health and human services. In that case, the committee decision came down to the vote of one Republican senator who is also a physician, and has publicly stated he is very pro vaccination and hoped to never have to witness another parent lose a child to a preventable disease. Yet for some reason, he voted to approve his fitness to serve.

I have no idea why, but we now have measles outbreaks in parts of the country which have resulted the death of at least one child. Here is an article about that same Senators displeasure with new vaccination policy in his own state. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/feb/16/louisiana-vaccines-rfk-jr

Either way, in those two cases, I can see how the positions are a great thing to have, but only when the people who are elected to the positions actually do their jobs. Instead what we have is basically theatre that, as you correctly put it, just further undermines credibility of the entire government.

Hi all, Hope this is ok for me to post here, apologies if not. I’m in the U.S. and recently joined Lemmy looking for a place to have uncensored discussions about U.S. and global issues.

I am curious to hear how U.K.ers feel about this proposed law. It seems like an attempt to create some additional checks and balances and avoid unchecked power by the Prime Minister.

Watching executive power currently being used as a weapon to destroy any chance of public opinion pumping the breaks on insane policy makes this seem like a good idea, but I also know legal process and politics are very different in the U.K., so I would love to hear U.K. thoughts and opinions about this. If there is a better place for me to post this, I will delete it and move it there.

The reason this article caught my attention, is the mention of the former special adviser to David Davis, and his opposition to the bill.

I’ll be honest, before last month, I didn’t know who David Davis was, but have taken an interest in his connection to U.S. politics and the Trump administration.

Davis is the father-in-law of Michael Kratsios, Trump’s Science Advisor nominee and Director of Office of Science and Technology Policy. Kratsios is also a former employee of Peter Theil, and is focused on AI policy.

Given the UK-US refusal to join other countries signing an AI declaration, (which included agreeing to join other countries in defending against a cyber attack by another nation like oh idk…Russia), I find the connection between Davis and Kratsios very suspicious. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c8edn0n58gwo

I also know that Musk is planning on opening an xAI branch in the UK, and I have been screaming into the void for months trying to warn people in the U.S. about his xAI data centers. I’m not sure how much news coverage this has received in the U.K., but there’s been hardly any focused coverage of all of the shady things surrounding xAI in the U.S.

I hope voters in the U.K. are aware of all of these things, if only for the sake of staying informed. Let me know if you would like to discuss any of this stuff, or know of a community that would be better to start a discussion about this.

Thanks!

Thank you! Like I said I’m still figuring things out. The instance I joined says you can’t post images until 40 days after joining. Is there an alternative way to do that?

Oh it was in the ysk community on .world

Thanks!

I guess it would be community specific. Just looking around for places to share stuff, but it seems like it fits in many ways with the topic of the community but also includes aspects that might be in violation of the rules.

I will try just asking individual communities

I guess on a broad topic level the closest would be public health, but it’s been so misrepresented it’s also become an issue of politics and privatization of public information

I am still learning how to navigate everything but I guess mainly community based? I really would like to share literally anywhere I could that would be interested in learning about the information.

Basically I guess it would be most closely a topic of public health policy being greatly misrepresented.