this post was submitted on 16 Sep 2023
250 points (93.4% liked)

politics

19107 readers
2812 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] mathemachristian@lemm.ee 45 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Why should we compromise on labor rights in favor of environmentalism? The latter wouldn't be such a problem if the former had been taken care of decades ago.

[–] ElectricAirship@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 1 year ago (3 children)

EVs don't save the environment, they save the car industry.

[–] mathemachristian@lemm.ee 7 points 1 year ago

EV != car. And even those have a use case. Having good EVs is necessary to wean off fossil fuels.

No one thing 'saves' the environment, it's beyond fucked at this point but EVs sure as shit is part of the solution and you can piss off with your perfection being the enemy of good stance here.

[–] ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Car industry isn't going anywhere, regardless. Plus, do you really think vehicles with less maintenance and longer lifespans is going to save the industry?

[–] PostmodernPythia@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If the alternative would be cutting production by 95%? Yes.

[–] ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 1 year ago

What gives you that idea?

[–] inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I honestly don't get some people where they constantly want to pit everyone and everything against each other. Honestly it's not some stupid zero sum game here.

If everyone got along, the republican party wouldn't exist. Their power is division of the people.