i post the one piece threads 
Ford’s style of corruption is keeping big party donors, who just so happen to be friends with him, happy with policies that hugely benefit them. The closest anyone’s actually proven to him having money directly change hands is when he invited those same donors to his daughter’s Stag & Doe party with like $5000 plates.
Despite the other replies’ good points, I think Doug Ford’s Ontario is a unique case because he’s so terminally car brained he sincerely thinks that adding more car infrastructure will help relieve traffic. On top of that he’s also a corrupt pig that’s making decisions almost entirely for the benefit of capitalists who have been friendly with him. Basically all his major transit decisions have been made to juice property values for big land owners (Highway 413, Bradford Bypass, Ontario Line stations, etc).
The Democratic Party being anti democracy is a great bit, very funny
I agree similarly. Degrowth includes a critique of the consumption economy and overproduction of unnecessary products, but there’s no incentive for capitalists and governments to actually pursue that in a way that makes sense for capitalism, so there’s no concrete path towards degrowth policy until something necessitates it. I do however appreciate the research being done as it provides a vision for socialists in industrialized and post-industrialized countries.
Per Jason Hickel, one of the leading advocates of degrowth, this review is selectively excluding a large amount of degrowth studies.
This hit piece has already come under heavy criticism and for good reason. The methodology really is extremely flawed.
The authors look only at studies with “post-growth” or “degrowth” in the title, but this ignores much of the key empirical work that has shaped and advanced the field recently. The strange thing is that the authors are fully aware of this broader literature, and yet they exclude it.
Not all degrowth research has “degrowth” in the title! Just as not all research on political economy has “political economy” in the title. Basics. Huge swathes of research are ignored… all the work on demand-side mitigation, sufficiency-oriented approaches, energy convergence, ecosocialism, decoupling, doughnut economics, etc — including work reviewed by the IPCC — all of it is ignored.
As Julia Steinberger pointed out, of the 33 papers published under her last major grant on degrowth, only two of them would qualify under this criteria.
Also, if you design your review to include opinion, guess what, you’re going to get a lot of opinion! This is true of any field. This tells us nothing about whether the empirical basis of current degrowth arguments is sound. For that, you need to assess the empirical studies that people actually use for this purpose. And again, most of those are not covered in this review.
Foundation issues too
Awesome thank you for checking 
deleted by creator
Will this be pirate friendly or should I just bite the bullet and get a legit version?
This is how DSP becomes good at games
He was good when he was making silly gaming videos as a disembodied voice. Had a lot of good will from the fact that he was donating almost all his youtube earnings for years to charity and being ostensibly nice. He’s a not a complete reactionary dipshit, but he’s still a youtube drama channel
Wait did Tom Cotton get smoked by a contraption?
Explains a lot tbh
Man tumblr is so cucked, unbelievably dire website
Hi crime welcome back! How was the grilling?
Cowards didn’t even talk about the world land bridge in their declaration
Did these grifter hacks finally break from the LaRouchites?
Pan-Canadian brainworms