[k_sh]

I'm glad we're waking up to this fact.

It's not enough to hold a belief... in our system, action is required. I think this is why young people are so frequently screwed by political decisions and policy - we are, uncoincidentally, the age group that votes least often.

[pmoriarty]

Voting alone is not enough. In some parts of the world, like Australia, voting is mandatory and as a result lot of people just vote randomly.

A good education in civics and history is necessary, as is a belief in the political system and a desire to make a difference in the world through political action. Finally, a strong and independent media that does a lot of deep investigative journalism and does a good job of providing context and background on important issues instead of catering to the lowest common denominator is key, as without it people are much more easily manipulated and mislead.

[intothemild]

As a politics major from an Australian university, and as someone who now lives in Norway. You’re about 50% right.

Yes in Australia mandatory voting has some people who “donkey vote” or as you call it “vote randomly” that percentage is almost all the 18-22 range. It’s not till they have to sit through a full one or two election cycles before they start to give a shit.

As such my generation has seen the bullshit that’s been handed to us, we won’t stand for it. It is generational because of the two major parties, their “young” version hasn’t had anyone transition from the young party to the major party for members of GenX. It’s only now when the boomers are retiring are we starting to see some younger blood. Why? Cause those that didn’t give a shit, now care and it’s a huge wave of people.

Politics are so much more left here in Norway, because people are educated and give a shit. The fucking Christian Right party just came up with the policy to decriminalise all drugs because putting people in jail and fining them wasn’t working. So why not try to help them with counsellors instead. No fines, no jail time... just help if they want it.

What’s Australia doing? Well we just voted to dump a bunch of shit in the middle of the Great Barrier Reef because it’s inconvinent for the super rich assholes to ship their exports around it. Got to make a way through it for the ships.

That shit won’t last with my generation.

[gcb0]

believing in a system where you have to be vigilant 24/7 is very counterproductive.

The fact that our system was corrupted to the point of requiring it is not a point to elate! it is a point to contempt.

> the age group that votes least often.

That's a very disingenuous argument that you yourself refuted in the first paragraph...If it doesn't matter only voting, does voting alone matters? At which point is political participation enough participation? voting, attending every single local and federal meeting? at which point will it suffice? Should everyone drop their profession and become professional politicians just to have a modicum of voice in the system?

As long as we allow absurd amounts of money in politics, nobody will have a voice. no matter how much you vote or post online.

When you are filling your taxes, after writing the "owned amount" in box 22 or your 1040, say it out loud "it is OK i am paying 40% of my income, because amazon deserves to pay zero since they did participate in politics, unlike me".

[kortilla]

>because amazon deserves to pay zero since they did participate in politics, unlike me

Stop repeating this meme. Amazon paid no income tax because of carried losses, which has absolutely nothing to do with its involvement in politics and carrying losses is available to every business (including sole proprietorships).

[sitkack]

Anything amazon loses they lose on purpose. Most of us don’t have the opp to structure our tax liability like this.

We are pawns to lose in a game between Alpha Go and the IRS.

[ghufran_syed]

Amazon makes money: I suspect you would say "they make too much money!" Amazon loses money: you say "they lose on purpose!" What position would you be happy with? Your position reminds me of arguments I used to have with religious zealots in my family - when people have a religious or moral objection to something (large businesses in this case), then whatever the offending party does is 'sinful' in some way and must therefore be criticized, whether it makes logical sense or not

[sitkack]

The fact that my argument reminds you of something doesn’t make the analogy true. But I appreciate the rhetorical device of calling me a religious zealot. Well done!

Amazon is wildly profitable, if they ever have a loss, it is manufactured. An accounting trick. When they start having real unavoidable losses, we can talk again.

[JetSpiegel]

"Amazon loses money" but Bezos is getting richer. Does not compute.

It's clearly paper losses.

[gcb0]

the context is the ny deal and I extrapolated a little too be more realistic representative. do the exercise with your state tax, if it will help you not think this is a meme.