#social responsibility policies

[inniave]

US Americans, please visit the link below to write your representatives & urge them to push back against mask bans!

We all deserve to have the basic freedom to protect ourselves from airborne diseases. If the government won't protect us, we must protect ourselves.

[wonder-worker]

The division between the two families [the Woodvilles and the Nevilles] and their allies can be seen in the royal charters that they witnessed. Warwick, Rivers and Archbishop Neville of York, while serving as chancellor and afterwards, were fairly constant witnesses to royal charters and consequently often appeared together. This was not, however, the case for other family members and friends. From 1466 to 1469, if Scales or Woodville associates like Sir John Fogge, John Lord Audley or Humphrey Lord Stafford of Southwick witnessed royal charters, then members of the Neville group, such as John Neville, earl of Northumberland, or John Lord Wenlock would not, and vice versa. Discounting the ubiquitous Warwick, Rivers and Archbishop Neville, of the twenty-four charters issued between February 1466 and June 1469, twelve were witnessed by men associated with the Woodvilles, eight by men associated with the Nevilles and two were witnessed by no member of either group beyond the two earls at their heads and the archbishop; only two charters, both from 1466, featured associates of both families.

Such striking segregation of witnesses suggests that something more than simple convenience or availability was at play. [...] The evidence of these witness lists does show the extent of the split between the two groups from early in Edward's [first] reign and of the need for political society to work with that cleavage in the heart of the Yorkist regime."

-Theron Westervelt, "Royal charter witness lists and the politics of the reign of Edward IV"

*This is specifically applicable for Edward IV's first reign; in contrast, the charters in his second reign displayed a great deal of aristocratic and domestic unity and cohesion.

[omegaphilosophia]

The Impact of Extreme Wealth on Society: Unraveling the Complex Web

In the 21st century, the issue of wealth inequality has reached unprecedented levels. The ultra-rich, a minuscule fraction of the global population, possess a staggering amount of wealth, often equivalent to that of entire countries. While wealth accumulation isn't inherently problematic, the concentration of extreme wealth in the hands of a few has far-reaching consequences for society. In this blog post, we'll explore how the ultra-rich have contributed to many of the problems we face today.

Wealth Inequality: Perhaps the most obvious consequence of extreme wealth is the exacerbation of wealth inequality. The gap between the richest and the rest has grown to alarming proportions. This inequality can lead to social unrest and hinder economic growth by limiting opportunities for the majority.

Economic Disparities: Extreme wealth often translates into disproportionate economic power. This can result in monopolistic practices, which stifle competition and innovation. Smaller businesses struggle to compete, leading to fewer choices for consumers.

Social Issues: Wealth inequality contributes to a host of social issues, including reduced access to education, healthcare, and housing for marginalized communities. It also perpetuates cycles of poverty that are difficult to escape.

Power and Influence: The ultra-rich have outsized political influence. They can shape public policies to their advantage, often at the expense of the common good. This undermines the democratic principles upon which many societies are built.

Corporate Dominance: Many of the wealthiest individuals are tied to large corporations. Their influence over these entities can lead to decisions that prioritize profits over environmental responsibility or workers' rights.

Political Lobbying: Lobbying efforts by the ultra-rich can influence legislation in their favor. This can result in tax breaks for the wealthy, further exacerbating wealth inequality.

Tax Evasion: Some of the ultra-rich engage in tax evasion schemes, depriving governments of revenue needed for essential public services. This places a heavier burden on ordinary taxpayers.

Public Policy: The ultra-rich can use their influence to push for policies that benefit them financially, such as reduced regulations or favorable trade agreements. These policies may not align with the best interests of society as a whole.

Poverty Alleviation: While philanthropy is common among the wealthy, it often falls short of addressing systemic issues. Charity, while commendable, cannot replace comprehensive government programs aimed at poverty alleviation.

Social Responsibility: Extreme wealth can lead to a detachment from the daily struggles of ordinary people. This lack of empathy can hinder efforts to address pressing social and economic challenges.

The impact of extreme wealth on society is a multifaceted issue. While it's crucial to acknowledge the positive contributions of wealthy individuals, it's equally important to scrutinize the consequences of concentrated wealth and power. Addressing these issues requires thoughtful public policy, increased transparency, and a commitment to a more equitable society. By recognizing the challenges posed by extreme wealth, we can work towards a more just and inclusive future for all.

[liyazaki]

.

[definitelynotnia]

normalise saying "I don't have enough information on this topic to have an opinion on it"

and then staying out of it completely rather than going along with wtv opinion u imprinted from three random posts/reels/tweets and having weird misinformed debates with full confidence

[divinekangaroo]

I didn't expect studying MBA level economics would suddenly make me madly interested in politics. It's like the only thing I've ever read/considered that has given politics the contextual layer and reality to make it real and interesting to me.

[ivygorgon]

AN OPEN LETTER to THE PRESIDENT & U.S. CONGRESS; STATE GOVERNORS & LEGISLATURES

Act Now: Save Public Transit from Extinction!

2 so far! Help us get to 5 signers!

I am writing to highlight the critical state of public transit in the United States and urge your support increased investment in this essential service. The challenges facing public transit—under-investment, over-reliance on car ownership, and racial disparities—have been exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. It is imperative that we take bold action to address these issues for the benefit of our communities and our future.

Investing in public transit is not merely a matter of convenience; it is a necessity for tackling climate change, advancing equity, supporting essential workers, and fostering economic recovery. The largest source of carbon emissions in the U.S. stems from transportation, and increased investment in public transit can significantly reduce this impact. Furthermore, public transit plays a crucial role in providing equitable access to jobs, schools, and services, especially for those who cannot afford or do not have access to private vehicles.

With over 2.8 million essential workers relying on public transit, our pandemic response and economic recovery hinge on the strength and viability of our transit systems. According to studies, sustained investment in public transportation yields substantial economic returns, with every $1 billion invested annually resulting in approximately $5 billion in additional GDP.

I commend initiatives like the Green New Deal for Transportation and efforts by organizations such as the CHARGE coalition to electrify and expand public transportation. These initiatives are pivotal in shaping a more sustainable and equitable transportation system for all Americans.

Therefore, I urge you to support emergency relief funding for public transit and join the movement to rebuild and improve our public transit system. This is not just an investment in infrastructure; it is an investment in our collective future.

Thank you for your attention to this urgent matter. I look forward to your support in advancing policies that will ensure a robust and accessible public transit system for all.

📱 Text SIGN PZHBAF to 50409

🤯 Liked it? Text FOLLOW IVYPETITIONS to 50409

💘 Q'u lach' shughu deshni da. 🏹 "What I say is true" in Dena'ina Qenaga

[drumlincountry]

The job I just quit asked me to join their board of management. Why do people want me on their board of management so bad. One time an organisation rejected my job application in the same email as asking if i'd serve on their board. Pay me, motherfuckers.

[dontmeantobepoliticalbut]

President Joe Biden plans to go on the offensive against Republicans, saying in effect that their policies would add $3 trillion to the national debt.

“If you add up all the proposals that my Republican friends in Congress have offered so far, they would add another $3 trillion to the debt over 10 years,” Biden plans to say, according to excerpts of the speech. “You’ll see that my budget will invest in America, lower costs and protect and strengthen Social Security and Medicare, while cutting the deficit by $2 trillion over 10 years.”

Ahead of Biden’s remarks to union workers Wednesday in Lanham, Maryland, the White House also issued a fact sheet that questions the GOP’s sincerity on deficit reduction.

The White House is charging the GOP with hypocrisy for favoring tax policies that could push the accumulated $31.4 trillion national debt higher. Yet Biden, too, wants to preserve some of the same tax cuts as Republicans so long as the approach is “fiscally responsible.”

The speech is the latest evolution in a political and economic debate that will play out over several months. Biden and House Speaker Kevin McCarthy need to reach a deal mid-summer on raising the government’s legal borrowing authority or else the government could lack the funds to pay its bills and default.

McCarthy, R-Calif., says they should agree on a path toward balancing the budget, posting on Twitter last Friday: “No more blank checks for runaway government spending.”

The President detailed a recent exchange with the GOP speaker in a speech Tuesday in Washington to county government officials. He told them that McCarthy “made it real clear to me what he wants to do. He says he’s not going to raise any taxes at all on anybody. He just wants to cut programs.”

The President said that Republican lawmakers should present their budget plan to the public, just as the White House intends to do on March 9.

“I believe we could be fiscally responsible without risking — threatening to send our country into chaos,” Biden said Tuesday of debt limit talks.

But the actual path of the national debt could hinge on the upcoming expiration of individual tax cuts that President Donald Trump signed into law in 2017. Extending those tax cuts would in theory raise the national debt, as the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office based its projections on them lapsing after 2025. The CBO will release an updated budget outlook on Wednesday.

The White House fact sheet said Republicans would increase the debt by $2.7 trillion by prolonging those tax cuts, in addition to cutting a corporate minimum tax established by Biden and other policies that would add to the debt.

The White House noted that the extension of the Trump-era tax overhaul would give a $175,000 tax cut to families with incomes over $4 million. The size of that tax cut is roughly double the median U.S. household income.

But the same White House fact sheet adds that Biden would like to preserve some of the same tax cuts as Republicans, just not those that benefit the wealthy. Biden pledged during the 2020 campaign to not raise taxes on anyone making under $400,000, so letting the tax cuts expire could be viewed as a tax hike on the middle class.

The Tax Policy Center, a think tank, estimated when the law was passed that 53% of taxpayers would see their IRS bills increase in 2027 after the cuts expire. About 70% of those solidly in the middle class — the middle 40% to 60% of all taxpayers — would owe more.

The fact sheet previewing the speech said the President is committed to a “fiscally responsible approach to continuing current tax policies” for people earning less than $400,000. It’s not entirely clear what that could mean for the national debt, despite Biden’s plans on Wednesday to repeat his promise in last week’s State of the Union address to cut deficits by $2 trillion.

That leaves Republicans and Democrats theoretically in agreement on keeping taxes low for most people, while leaders in both parties have pledged no cuts to Social Security or Medicare.

Maya MacGuineas, president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, said that lawmakers should consider everything if the goal is deficit reduction.

“If we truly want to address our fiscal situation — as we should — policymakers should put all their cards on the table, abandon their demagoguing, and come together for the good of the American people,” she said in a statement.

[antiherotheantisocial]

babes why don't you think you'll ever be in a relationship? ur breaking my heart here reading ur tags

skip to the tags for the short answer lmaooooooo

breaking your heart? secretly in love with me??? 😧😶‍🌫️ but aaahhhhhhh 😮‍💨💕

i'm aromantic 😭😭😭 i'm not sure that i've ever felt romantic attraction, nor even know what it is, so it's a bit difficult to say otherwise and i just realized this year. 😔 i mean when i think about it most of the "crushes" i've had are mainly centered around sexual attraction/infatuation/lust or whatever you want to call it lmaooo....i care for the person, it just never dawns on me that i want anything with them in a romantic sense, i'm wayyy too nonchalant for that honestly and everyone deserves the best, which is most definitely not me lmaoo 😭 like i've never even thought about it because for me it's like.....i would only be in a relationship if i know for sure i could be committed to building a future with them for life, or honestly i would probably be down for a relationship if they wanted. like why not i guess which....is also a problem because then it gets considered as settling lmaooo which for me it most definitely is not..

the only thing that i might be inclined to say is slightly close to romantic attraction that i experience is limerence. but it's not like....from a place of love. 😭😭😭 now that i think of it it's probably like, having intrusive thoughts of a person. it's just all the time and as much as i try to stop i can't and it sucks because i do actually care about the person for who they are but obviously that makes it seem otherwise 😭😭😭

it's weird to explain. i do want a relationship and i do want to build a future with someone special where i could support their goals and they are able to be emotionally open with me but i don't have to be emotionally open with them and we can cuddle and watch shitty ass med shows with the worst fucking cpr but, i'm super picky and have extremely high standards lmaooo like is it really realistic.....girl........be real 😭😭😭😭😭😭 i get on my last goddamned NERVE

and then it's like, i already know that i'll be paranoid probably and most likely won't be satisfied because i'm not sure that anyone's love will be enough for me. (quote in my ul tag)

and at the end of the day (finally right? lmaoooo) it's like morally i don't want to play with or hurt anyone's feelings.

like all of this is mine alone to deal with and it's things that i should handle and work through before even considering a relationship but realistically i'm not sure that i can fast enough sooooooooo 😔

i'm sorry my tags probably come off as some edgy loser (which i am mind you ☝️😈) but don't feel bad don't let my tags break your heart omggg 😭😭🥺💖 i'm just some guy that's a son's son daughter. 😭😭 i keep myself in a loop of extreme self-criticism for minimal growth lmaoooo i'm okay (trust me 🫡).

maybe i shouldn't've said never but like....extremely unlikely. like...99% chance that i won't. love really isn't something that happens to people like me which is....ok! it's still a joy to see it happen for other people 😌💕🥰🤍💗💕

anyways fuck it we ball 🥱💯💪😈⏭️⏫🥶

[jedibongrip]

What's your writing about HIV for?

a grade

[sapphia]

USA please listen to me: the price of “teaching them a lesson” is too high. take it from New Zealand, who voted our Labour government out in the last election because they weren’t doing exactly what we wanted and got facism instead.

Trans rights are being attacked, public transport has been defunded, tax cuts issued for the wealthy, they've mass-defunded public services, cut and attacked the disability funding model, cut benefits, diverted transport funding to roads, cut all recent public transport subsidies, cancelled massive important infrastructure projects like damns and ferries (we are three ISLANDS), fast tracked mining, oil, and other massive environmentally detrimental projects and gave the power the to approve these projects singularly to three ministers who have been wined and dined by lobbyists of the companies that have put the bids in to approve them while one of the main minister infers he will not prioritise the protection of endangered species like the archeys frog over mining projects that do massive environmental harm. They have attacked indigenous rights in an attempt to negate the Treaty of Waitangi by “redefining it”; as a backup, they are also trying to remove all mentions of the treaty from legislation starting with our Child Protection laws no longer requiring social workers to consider the importance of Maori children’s culture when placing those children; when the Waitangi Tribunal who oversees indigenous matters sought to enquire about this, the Minister for Children blocked their enquiry in a breach of comity that was condemned in a ruling — too late to do anything — by our Supreme Court. They have repealed labour protections around pay and 90 day trials, reversed our smoking ban, cancelled our EV subsidy, cancelled our water infrastructure scheme that would have given Maori iwi a say in water asset management, cancelled our biggest city’s fuel tax, made our treasury and inland revenue departments less accountable, dispensed of our Productivity Commission, begun work on charter schools and military boot camps in an obvious push towards privatisation, cancelled grants for first home buyers, reduced access to emergency housing, allowed no cause evictions, cancelled our Maori health system that would have given Maori control over their own public medical care and funding, cut funding of services like budgeting advice and food banks, cancelled the consumer advocacy council, cancelled our medicine regulations, repealed free prescriptions, deferred multiple hospital builds, failed to deliver on pre-election medical promises, reversed a gun ban created in response to the mosque shootings, brought back three strikes = life sentence policy, increased minimum wage by half the recommended amount, cancelled fair pay for disabled workers, reduced wheelchair services, reversed our oil and gas exploration ban, cancelled our climate emergency fund, cut science research funding including climate research, removed limits on killing sea lions, cut funding for the climate change commission, weakened our methane targets, cancelled Significant National Areas protections, have begun reversing our ban on live exports. Much of this was passed under urgency.

It’s been six months.

[newsepick]

Increase Access to Higher Education -Newsepick CSR Discover Newsepick's commitment to CSR, which aims to make education accessible for all and build a sustainable ecosystem of opportunity.

Read More : https://newsepick.com/company/csr

[imsobadatnicknames2]

i've really been struggling to articulate this lol but

There's a very specific kind of privileged worldview that has become apparent to me in the recent wave of (usually European) non-US bloggers making posts like "my US followers and friends, don't forget that American politics influence the politics of the rest of the world too, you have a responsibility to all of us" where it becomes clear that their idea of how "American politics influencing the rest of the world" works is like "if republicans win in the US other countries follow their example and become more right wing by like osmosis or something" and not "the US government engages in a longstanding bipartisan policy of sabotaging social and labor reforms in other countries for the material economic gain of US businesses, which universally involves propping up and supporting far-right governments through a variety of means both direct and indirect"

[kesarijournal]

The Curious Case of the Honorable Travel Agents and the Migration Mirage: A Tragicomedy from Punjab

Once upon a time, in the land of five rivers, where dreams of foreign lands flourish like the crops in its fertile fields, the Punjab Government (Akali Dal Badal) decided to sprinkle a bit of regulatory magic dust over the profession of travel agents. With a wave of their legislative wand, they declared, “Let there be order!” And thus, the travel agents were ushered under the watchful eyes of the…