skisnow

joined 9 months ago
[–] skisnow@lemmy.ca 5 points 5 hours ago (3 children)

I’ve seen the “one person selling lots of stocks in an otherwise healthy company to raise cash tanks the market” claim repeated so many places as one of these “everyone knows this, it’s obvious” facts, and yet it never seems to play out that way to any meaningful degree. It’s one of the many Big Lies of capitalism that we’ve just been tricked into accepting.

You might occasionally see a minor one day dip of a few percent at worst, and even then they’re usually caused by some underlying issue unrelated to one person’s need for liquidity.

[–] skisnow@lemmy.ca 3 points 6 hours ago

This isn't a news story, it's an advertorial.

[–] skisnow@lemmy.ca 2 points 6 hours ago

I don't know how much of her account is posts like this because I don't want to send a single byte to Twitter, but I've seen that name attached to enough other leopardsatemyface style content to be convinced this specific post does not represent what you could call her moment of realization.

[–] skisnow@lemmy.ca 5 points 8 hours ago

Yay let’s make all cars the same colour as the road

[–] skisnow@lemmy.ca 3 points 13 hours ago (6 children)
[–] skisnow@lemmy.ca 0 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago)

Dairy, by nature of stress-spoiling, is relatively cruelty-free.

Blatant industry lying propaganda horseshit. The meat industry is rife with cruelty, to pretend otherwise is straight up dishonest.

There’s states where the industry even managed to get filming in a factory farm made illegal because they know just how unpleasant the entire operation is.

Your argument essentially boils down to "some animals can take more abuse than others before their bodies break down, therefore if you only eat the more fragile ones it's relatively less cruel, so go ahead and enjoy".

[–] skisnow@lemmy.ca 7 points 20 hours ago

I think it’s even worse; suffering for their leader is how they prove their loyalty. Now they’re even more invested in him than they ever were.

[–] skisnow@lemmy.ca -1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

oh look, another votescold so thoroughly convinced that everything would have been fine if only everyone followed their campaign strategy, that they're literally blaming anti-fascists for fascism. How about blaming actual fascists instead?

[–] skisnow@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 days ago

You don’t even need to bring income into it. Inflation is the whole point of the “things were cheaper in the old days” trope, if you adjust for inflation then all you’re saying is we’ve seen zero progress. Even on its own terms it’s still not a brag.

[–] skisnow@lemmy.ca 3 points 3 days ago

I don't think it's so much a "policing" thing as a side effect of other platforms whose algorithms will avoid boosting certain sensitive topics. People do stuff like this to bypass it and then other people see it happening and think that's just what you're supposed to do.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thought-terminating_clich%C3%A9

As the party fielded more and more candidates who championed economic-right policies in order to attract corporate donations, the idea of "purity testing" was turned into a stock phrase to attack critics using labels, instead of justifying it on its own terms.

Phrases like "moral purity" now serve two functions: firstly, to dismiss criticisms from the Left wholesale without having to discuss them directly, and secondly, to blame them for the rise of fascism.

In theory it was also supposed to serve a third function of bullying the Left into voting Democrat, but that didn't work.

view more: next ›