do you think plurality will become widely accepted any time soon? i fear that my plurality will have to be hidden from most people my whole life. i wish i could tell our parents but i feel like they would immediately take me to a mental hospital..
i wish plural education could move faster lol
Widely accepted? I wouldn't count on it anytime soon. Sorry.
As Ghandi never said: "first they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win”
While the quote isn't from Ghandi, it is still a pretty accurate one for how movements tend to go. And the problem is, we're still in the ignoring stage with a side of mockery.
Before we can get widespread acceptance, we need widespread awareness. And when we get widespread awareness, the biggest roadblock we'll encounter is direct opposition. Because then we'll be a threat. We'll be trying to change things. We'll be demanding our headmates be acknowledged as individuals and called by their names, and that's going to make certain people, especially on the Right, extremely uncomfortable. I'm sorry to say that they will lash out.
When Tulpamancers are being smeared not by randos on Tumblr or r/systemscringe, but by Sean Hannity, that's when you can know that the real fight for plural acceptance has started. And everything we've gone through before that has just been a prelude.
And then it will probably drag out for years after that.
But while that prospect is scary, I think it will be necessary for getting to where we need to be.
...
But just because society isn't there yet and won't be for a while, that doesn't mean your parents won't be. Plenty of people have come out to their parents successfully. Others came out unsuccessfully, and then their parents warmed up to the idea later.
I would advise waiting until you're an adult if you aren't already, because parents have a lot of power over minors in their care, and things could go very badly. Best not come out, if you think they would react badly, while they have power over you. Additionally, I don't know if your system is traumagenic or not, but if it is, coming out to parents who may have been involved in that is probably a bad idea. Caution is advised.
...
One more thing, while that quote wasn't from Gandhi, I really love the speech it's believed to have originated from.
Plural acceptance may not come quick! It may not come easy! But it will come, and we are all a part of it just by being here and being ourselves!
The future is plural!
No matter how far off that future may seem!
37 notes
·
View notes
Excerpt from this story from Mother Jones:
The world’s 3,000 billionaires should pay a minimum 2 percent tax on their fast-growing wealth to raise about $313 billion a year for the global fight against poverty, inequality, and global heating, ministers from four leading economies have suggested.
In a sign of growing international support for a levy on the super-rich, Brazil, Germany, South Africa, and Spain say a 2 percent tax would reduce inequality and raise much-needed public funds after the economic shocks of the pandemic, the climate crisis and military conflicts in Europe and the Middle East.
They are calling for more countries to join their campaign, saying the annual sum raised would be enough to cover the estimated cost of damage caused by all of last year’s extreme weather events.
“It is time that the international community gets serious about tackling inequality and financing global public goods,” the ministers say in a Guardian comment piece. “One of the key instruments that governments have for promoting more equality is tax policy. Not only does it have the potential to increase the fiscal space governments have to invest in social protection, education, and climate protection. Designed in a progressive way, it also ensures that everyone in society contributes to the common good in line with their ability to pay. A fair share contribution enhances social welfare.”
Brazil chairs the G20 group of leading developed and developing countries and put a billionaire tax on the agenda at a meeting of finance ministers earlier this year.
The French economist Gabriel Zucman is now fleshing out the technical details of a plan that will again be discussed by the G20 in June. France has indicated support for a wealth tax and Brazil has been encouraged that the US, while not backing a global wealth tax, did not oppose it.
Zucman said: “Billionaires have the lowest effective tax rate of any social group. Having people with the highest ability to pay tax paying the least—I don’t think anybody supports that.”
Research from Oxfam published this year found that the boom in asset prices during and after the Covid pandemic meant billionaires were $3.3 trillion—or 34 percent—wealthier at the end of 2023 than they were in 2020. Meanwhile, a study from the World Bank showed that the pandemic had brought poverty reduction to a halt.
The opinion piece, signed by ministers from two of the largest European economies—Germany and Spain—and two of the largest emerging economies—Brazil and South Africa—claims a levy on the super-rich is a necessary third pillar to complement the negotiations on the taxation of the digital economy and the introduction earlier this year of a minimum corporate tax of 15 percent for multinationals.
“The tax could be designed as a minimum levy equivalent to 2 percent of the wealth of the super-rich. It would not apply to billionaires who already contribute a fair share in income taxes. Those, however, who manage to avoid paying income tax would be obliged to contribute more towards the common good,” the ministers say.
“Persisting loopholes in the system imply that high-net-worth individuals can minimize their income taxes. Global billionaires pay only the equivalent of up to 0.5 percent of their wealth in personal income tax. It is crucial to ensure that our tax systems provide certainty, sufficient revenues, and treat all of our citizens fairly.”
22 notes
·
View notes
In my opinion, in a solarpunk future, education about the environment should be mandatory in a good school system. This is why we do this , this is why we started doing this, etc. Today I heard my Theory of Knowledge teacher say that he doesn't believe that human beings directly affect climate change. Because I study environmental science I know that's simply not true.
Studying environmental science would teach so many people that all the systems of the earth are so interconnected. For me, that made me more aware that my choices had so many widespread impacts on many areas. I wasn't so passionate about the environment before I took this subject and it has made me think differently.
Other than this, I think indigenous or cultural knowledge should also be taught along with this. I think a lot of people in the solarpunk community know that if we do want to make an impact working with indigenous people is a good method. I was reading Braiding Sweetgrass and it's so noticeable that the way we see everything is influenced by a cultural perspective.
Either way, greater education about the environment is so, so important.
190 notes
·
View notes
Economic Systems
Economics is the social science that studies how individuals, firms, and societies allocate scarce resources among competing wants and needs. It is concerned with how people make choices and how those choices affect the production, consumption, and distribution of goods and services. Economics also examines how markets and economies function and how policies, such as taxes and regulations, can influence economic outcomes. The field of economics encompasses a broad range of topics, including microeconomics (which focuses on the behavior of individuals and firms), macroeconomics (which examines the performance of the overall economy), international trade, labor economics, environmental economics, and many others. Economists use a variety of tools and methods, including mathematical models, statistical analysis, and experiments, to understand economic phenomena and to inform policy decisions.
Here are some economic systems:
Capitalism: This economic system is based on private ownership of the means of production and the operation of markets for goods, services, and labor. In capitalism, prices and profits are determined by supply and demand, and individuals and firms are motivated by self-interest and the pursuit of profit.
Socialism: This economic system is based on collective ownership of the means of production and the distribution of goods, services, and labor based on the needs of society. In socialism, prices and production are determined by central planning or democratic decision-making, and individuals and firms are motivated by social goals and the public good.
Communism: This economic system is based on the common ownership of the means of production and the distribution of goods, services, and labor based on need. In communism, economic decisions are made by a centralized government, and individuals and firms are motivated by social goals and the public good.
Mixed economy: This economic system combines elements of capitalism and socialism, with both private and public ownership of the means of production and a mix of market and government intervention in economic activity. The mix of capitalism and socialism can vary widely between countries, with some favoring more market-oriented policies and others favoring more state intervention.
Market economy: This economic system is based on the operation of markets for goods, services, and labor, with prices and production determined by supply and demand. In a market economy, economic decisions are made by individuals and firms acting in their own self-interest, without centralized planning or government intervention.
Command economy: This economic system is based on central planning by a government or other central authority, with prices and production determined by the government rather than supply and demand. In a command economy, economic decisions are made by the government, rather than by individuals and firms acting in their own self-interest.
Mercantilism: This economic system emphasizes the accumulation of wealth and power through international trade, with the goal of exporting more than importing to achieve a favorable balance of trade.
Feudalism: This economic system was based on a hierarchical social structure in which land was owned by lords who granted use of the land to peasants in exchange for labor and goods.
Corporatism: This economic system emphasizes the role of large corporations and other organized interest groups in economic decision-making, often in collaboration with government.
Participatory economics: This economic system emphasizes democratic decision-making and equitable distribution of resources, and aims to provide economic opportunities and social justice through decentralized planning and worker self-management.
Market socialism: An economic system in which some or all of the means of production are owned by the state or by worker cooperatives, but the allocation of goods and services is determined by the market.
Mutualism: An economic system that advocates for worker cooperatives, mutual aid, and voluntary association. The goal is to create a society where people can produce and consume goods and services based on principles of equality, reciprocity, and justice.
Post-Keynesian economics: An economic system that builds on the ideas of John Maynard Keynes, emphasizing the role of government intervention in the economy to achieve full employment, price stability, and economic growth.
Georgism: An economic system based on the ideas of Henry George, which emphasizes that land is a common resource and should be taxed accordingly to prevent monopolies and encourage economic growth.
Islamic economics: An economic system based on Islamic principles, including the prohibition of interest, speculation, and hoarding of wealth, and the emphasis on social justice, charity, and cooperation.
Feminist economics: An economic system that emphasizes the role of gender in economic activity and seeks to address gender-based inequalities through policies and practices that promote gender equality and social justice.
Neoclassical economics: A dominant economic system that emphasizes the role of markets in allocating resources and assumes that individuals act rationally to maximize their own self-interest.
Austrian economics: An economic system based on the ideas of Austrian economists, including the emphasis on subjective value, the importance of entrepreneurship, and the rejection of central planning and government intervention in the economy.
Anarcho-capitalism: A political and economic system that advocates for the abolition of the state and the establishment of a free market where all goods and services are privately owned and exchanged.
Behavioral economics: A subfield of economics that combines insights from psychology, sociology, and other social sciences to explain and predict human behavior in economic decision-making.
Institutional economics: An economic system that emphasizes the importance of institutions, such as social norms, laws, and customs, in shaping economic behavior and outcomes.
Technocracy: A political and economic system that advocates for the use of technology and scientific expertise to manage and allocate resources for the benefit of society.
Resource-based economics: An economic system that emphasizes the importance of natural resources in economic activity and advocates for their sustainable use and management.
Social market economy: An economic system that combines free market principles with social welfare policies to promote economic growth, social justice, and ecological sustainability.
Green economics: An economic system that emphasizes the importance of environmental sustainability and advocates for policies and practices that promote the long-term health of the planet and its ecosystems.
Sharing economy: An economic system that emphasizes the sharing of resources, goods, and services among individuals and communities, often facilitated by digital platforms and technologies.
22 notes
·
View notes
The Professor
The professor:
Once said women who played a certain instrument just wouldn't make it.
All lost causes, the lot of them.
Befriended female students to get their attention and acceptance;
Fitting in with the crowd. (An insecure teenager in adult's clothing.)
Picked favourites from the group for special favours.
Couldn't hinder laughter when speaking
Inappropriate, degrading statements.
Utilised a favourite tool, public humiliation, in a sugar-coated voice.
Chose the chosen ones on social media to form an insiders group.
The professor was a woman.
Now, reverse the gender.
Was this appropriate?
Internalised misogyny, coming out to play.
2 notes
·
View notes