It's old, but still true

Both sides are a march to capitalism. Support Ranked Choice Voting.

How?
- Find your states organization for such, or start one.
  
  I live in California so the organization I volunteer for is https://www.calrcv.org/
- Pretend each ballot is a ranked choice ballot and list your top 3 candidates in order.
the voting system alone won't break the two party system.

Approval Voting is a better voting method anyway.

We're going to need to move to some kind of proportional system in order to get more parties, and sequential proportional approval is better suited for that task as well.

I'm only coming at you so strong because it's important that we get this right the first time. Approval is the way to go, both in the short term and the long term.

For those that don't know, approval works like this: vote for any number of candidates, most votes wins. That's it. It's dead simple while being one of the more accurate systems by multiple measures.

Link 1 Simulating Elections with Spatial Voter Models

Link 2 Simplified Spacial Model Example

Link 3 2012 OWS Polling

Link 4 Democratic Primary Polling

Link 5 2024 Republican primary

RCV has problems with spoilers, vote-splitting, and non-monotonicity. RCV is so messy we're not exactly sure how often an RCV election was influenced by a spoiler, but it could be as high as 14%, which would put around 75 people into Congress thanks to a spoiler. We know our happened in the Alaska special election, for example.

Anyway, if you want to help switch your local or state elections to approval (and you absolutely should) volunteer here!
- Where did you get the 14% figure?
- This sounds too good to be true. What are the downsides they aren't mentioning?
  
  Also, how would this system handle write ins? Could your ballot potentially be 1000 pages long?
Fwiw you should support IRV if you have to (if it's on a ballot against FPTP and is the only option), but it's basically the bare minimum acceptable voting system. FPTP is simply not democracy, but IRV is barely okay. Any single-winner system is inherently worse than a proportional system, because it can be subject to gerrymandering, and it's majoritarian. IRV might allow minor parties to exist without hurting their more-closely-aligned major party, but it won't do a great job of letting them actually get representation.

Take Australia for example. Our House of Representatives uses IRV, and our Senate uses the proportional system of STV. Our major parties are Labor (centre-left) and Liberal/National coalition (right). Our most noteworthy minor party are the Greens (left). The Greens consistently get about 10%. In the House of Representatives, at the last election they achieved a record 2.7% of the seats in the Reps (their previous best was 0.7% despite over 10% of voters putting them first), and they currently have 14.5% of Senate seats, on the back of a 12.3% and 12.7% first-preference vote, respectively.

IRV helps, because it removes the spoiler effect in real-world scenarios. You should support it as better than FPTP if you have to, and not let the perfect by the enemy of the good. But it shouldn't be what you aim for in an ideal scenario.
This won't solve the problem, the root problem is you cannot have both democracy and capitalism.

It’s the wealthy that have nothing to worry about, as Joe nothing will fundamentally change Biden has said.

He wasn’t lying, he knew he wasn’t gonna get much shit through Congress when he had a 50/50 split with two of those on his side being Sinema and Manchin and the other side having folks who possibly schemed in having his entire administration cancelled before it ever began
- Manchin and Sinema played their assigned roles as rotating villains. And if a rotating villain can’t be summoned, there’s always the Senate parliamentarian. And if not that, then there’s always splitting the bill, as was done for the impending rail strike last year.
  
  The Democrats punk us over & over. Both parties work for the capitalist class and against the working class.

The sky was the colour of a TV tuned to a dead channel.

War of the ants, we used to call it.
In the more recent publications, he talks at length about that opening line in the introduction.
- It's a great opening line.
Even in the 90s it was common for my TV to be blue when there was no input to display.
- Theyre talking about a empty channel that is showing static, AV signals are different.

Is it weird that my first thought was "because it's asbestos and you're not going to live much longer anyway?"

I thought dry asbestos was harmless? Watch out for trying to remove it, though. The powder is terrible for you.
- Undisturbed asbestos is safe-ish... BIG emphasis on the "ish".
TBF I don't when it started, but it was in use long after asbestos was outlawed.
You're not alone

I don’t get it. But I also don’t subscribe to mainstream media and news. Is this a play on media trying to sell bidenomics as good for common, or most, people?

I think the implication is that rich people don't have popcorn ceilings, so if you do, you don't make enough money that his tax plan will hurt you. The premise seems flawed to me, but I could be interpreting it wrong.
- Ceiling types who NEED to worry:
- Nah you’re spot on.
- Ah, I was thinking "it's probably asbestos so long term financial planning is not something you should worry about" but your interpretation makes way more sense.
- will the tax plan actually "hurt" the rich or will it simply limit their means to get even richer?
- I was thinking it was a joke about asbestos. Yours makes more sense.
- I don't think you're wrong. I grew up in a more affluent area, and these types of ceilings are very popular there.
"The media" isn't trying to "sell" Biden's tax plan. Some guy on the internet is saying via meme that if you have popcorn ceilings, you don't have to worry about your taxes going up under Biden. Biden has famously pledged that he will not increase taxes on people making less than $400,000/year, so the implication is that people with popcorn ceilings make less than $400,000/year.
- Have you ever seen popcorn ceilings in any of your multimillionaire friends houses? The bootstrap friends that we all have‽
Is this a play on media trying to sell bidenomics as good for common, or most, people?

Yes, but in a way that makes it actually correct.

It's about assuaging fears of people who think Bidenomics are extreme and will be worse for the working class than the Reaganomics that's still somehow popular with Republicans.

It's not a whole-hearted endorsement of every aspect of Bidenomics or a claim that Biden is a true leftist.

my dad taught me how to do a lot of home renovation: installing new flooring, removing carpeting, painting interior and exterior walls, building screened in back porches, et cetera. one thing we did together was scraping the popcorn ceiling with a paint scraper, then tidying it up with the mud/putty/whatever it's called and painting it. I just wish i could buy my own place so i could renovate it.

Be careful handling asbestos. Damn stuff was in everything.
- I think we wore masks. But hey, it was the 90s, we played fast and loose with the safety guidelines back then.