1019
Bezos deletes 'LGBTQ+ rights' and 'equity for Black people' from Amazon policies
(www.irishstar.com)
this post was submitted on 23 Jan 2025
1019 points (98.8% liked)
politics
19536 readers
3828 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
That's a weird graph. Why does each label have 2 bars?
because saying 0-10% 11%-20% 21%-30% 31%-40% 41%-50% 51%-60% 61%-70% 71%-80% 81%-90% 91%-100% would create a label so fucking long.
It's implied that each grouping is the top 10% and bottom 10% of each 20% range, to me anyway.
Especially with the tallest having an extra label stating "top 10%"
Probably lazy graphing. I think they're trying to illustrate the difference between top 10 and 20 percent, then threw the others in as collective 20 percent bands. Pie chart might have been better.
to be more similar to the 10% 20% categories I would guess. the bottom 50% could probably be lumped together and it wouldn't change much of anything.
I wonder where the line of being able to afford food and housing would be in each graph and what is the percent of people bellow that. I think that's the important factor signifying how desperate people really are.
Personally I think graph is pretty egregious as long as we have a homeless or poverty problem to discuss, regardless of where the line of desperation is. We know people are under it, and not just a few. Not to mention the high percentage of middle class that are a paycheck or two from being unhoused.
Don't get me wrong - I know there are many desperate people now. I'd just like to see the comparison to pre-revolution France to see just how similar the situation really is based on hard data.
Ah I get your point. That would be interesting!