spoopy

I don't understand why you think "avoiding prison" equals free work for companies. The individuals contributing to open source are subject to the same laws we're discussing in this thread, and are the ones that would actually be getting consequences.

No one exists without a government, and that's not even a pipe dream, it'd be societal collapse.

The usual consequences to not following the law are not in your favor.

If your goal in contributing to FOSS is to go to prison, there are a lot better avenues to achieve that.

ain't

aave

What's worse is it's also usually more expensive than just doing it at the moment

Some call it hypocrisy, others call it "survival instinct"

fwiw, the roads are constantly littered with accidents and the US has the highest pedestrian fatality rate out of all "western" nations

Ironic considering in the USA this person would likely have a much more linent sentence for this specific crime

That's your prerogative, just recognize that if both options support genocide and block strikes, so you chose to vote for a non viable candidate, or to not vote, you're effectively disenfranchising yourself.

Your last point is very valid though. The DNC is very good at shooting themselves in the foot because they should know very well that people do get demotivated and just stop voting, yet continue to distance themselves from their voter base, resting on their laurels as "the only sane choice out of the two".

Supporting local candidates, where your vote also is more heavily weighted, is one of the ways to shift policy - the US govt isnt just the president, it's representatives and senators and state governments.

Voting for someone in an election in the US is not an endorsement of that person. You have effectively two choices in many of the elections due to how the system is designed. You vote for the best choice of those two.

Not voting, or voting for a non viable candidate, is a signal that you Do Not Care who is in power.

Voting is a tool, and a civic duty. It's one of the few ways US society allows direct input from citizens.

If you actually are against facism, don't use misguided idealism to encourage people to throw away the little political power they have.

It generally doesn't though. People who rent aren't suddenly going to be able to afford to buy. If you look at cities that do these policies, homeownership rates do go up, but the entire lower income community is basically evicted from the city. It's basically accelerated gentrification.

These types of policies also affect the types of units that get built. If rental units are a risky business move, then more construction will go towards larger single family homes, which are 1) less space efficient (fewer units), but 2) much more expensive (so the builder gets their money's worth)

The other thing is with rent control, housing stock will decrease because people will not move. If you are in a rent controlled unit, you're very strongly incentivised to never leave : because while your rent has been grandfathered to a low price, when you move you'll suddenly starting paying the inflated rates everyone else has been paying to offset the sub-market rents you had. Live in the same place long enough and this could be a 1000% increase.

There's an average renter turnover. If the market would usually see a 5% increase yoy, and average stay us 5 years, this 3% policy means you'd have tenents "underpaying" by about 13%. So, to compensate, instead of new leases being 27% more expensive, they'll be 40% more expensive after 5 years.

The root cause of all the raising home prices and rents is always the same: nimbys and lack of housing supply. Rent control works for people who are already in a home, but makes the problem worse for everyone else (who move, or become adults, etc)