Sheryl Weikal

"You can't support abolition/universal healthcare/reparations/universal housing/etc without being able to answer every possible hypothetical question about its implementation" is, frankly, horseshit.

The Wright brothers didn't need to be able to design a 747 to build the first airplane.

10:06pmopenvibe
Show threadSheryl Weikal1h ago
You don't need to know everything about everything or be a subject matter expert in a policy to support it. Plus, true subject matter experts will tell you THEY ALSO DON'T KNOW EVERYTHING, even about policies they're experts in!
Show threadSheryl Weikal1h ago
It's okay to say "this will be better than now, and once we see how it works in practice, we'll improve it again based on the data." It's okay to say that our first version doesn't have to be perfect, just the best we can do with the knowledge we have. And as we know more, we do more.
Show threadMinmiTheDino27m ago

@theleftistlawyer not like the ppl supporting the status quo have answers to all the horrific problems those systems engender. They’re just inured to them.

Like, oh we should have for profit housing? But how will you solve the issue of homelessness? Oh you will just ignore it? Ok well if that’s the bar…

Show threadStephen1h ago
@theleftistlawyer can I ask which thing you're abolishing in that list? Not salient to your (valid) point, I'm just wondering.
Show threadCuck Norris1h ago
@theleftistlawyer although if they *had* designed a boeing then we can only assume it would have turned out much worse
Show threadRobert Kingett1h ago
@theleftistlawyer There are countless studies that show why these policies work and yet, these kinds of benefits are always more frightening than fascism or means testing for example
Show threadJargoggles37m ago
@theleftistlawyer
Yeah, that's the kind of shit people pull when they don't want to actually solve problems, but don't want to feel like they're the kind of people who don't want to solve problems.