It’s complicated.

Unfortunately, the Wikipedia articles I found lack citations, so they probably aren’t a good source. They claim that the ROC (Taiwan) claims all of the mainland.

This reddit thread refers to the ROC constitution and interprets it as:

In the Act Governing Relations between the People of the Taiwan area and the Mainland area, the following is stated:

“Taiwan Area” refers to Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen, Matsu, and any other area under the effective control of the Government.

“Mainland Area” refers to the territory of the Republic of China outside the Taiwan Area.

“People of the Taiwan Area” refers to the people who have household registrations in the Taiwan Area.

“People of the Mainland Area” refers to the people who have household registrations in the Mainland Area.

The implication is that wherever this law applies, is what the ROC government considers to be “territory of the ROC outside of the Taiwan Area”. Currently the application of this law overlaps the entirety of the PRC, minus HK and Macau.

This the fun part. If you look at the ROC constitution, it makes […] mention to Mongolia and Tibet.

I don’t know how much of this applies beyond the KMT.

Though to be fair, Dutton was never going to be a better option.

Luckily we’re not trapped in a two-party dichotomy, Liberal’s opinions are slowly mattering less and less and minor candidates are getting more of the pie.

For those unfamiliar with Prime Minister Albanese:

• Founding member and secretary of Parliamentary Friends of Palestine around 2000^[1]
• Complicit in the zionist regime’s recent invasions and ongoing genocide in Gaza
• Australia trades with the regime, and arrested port protesters and members of the Maritime Union of Australia, including the leader of the Sydney branch
• Australia is the sole exporter of the F-35 bomber fuselage
• Australia repeatedly supported the invasion through UN voting

but decrease how much each person has available as resources? Essentially just throwing a lot of people into poverty?

That is not implied. Especially if we consider that the resources we waste are through supply chains rather than our own direct use. If my electrical supply comes from from a more efficient source, then my usage can be less wasteful and potentially cheaper. If my city continues to improve public transport, I can actually save money and use less resources in daily transit. Products we consume have serious potential to conserve resources at a mass scale, and often it even saves them money due to paying less for resources needed in production. A lot of waste also comes from overproduction, think of those Dunkin’ Donuts end-of-day-disposal videos. We make far more than we need in so many areas.

Furthermore, the most wasteful people are a minority of the mega-rich. You and I probably don’t need to cut down much on jet fuel costs. People close to poverty usually aren’t (directly) wasteful, hell, some of them actually reduce waste through dumpster-diving and recycling schemes.

If that would ever happen.

Well, you see, the thing about capitalism is it empowers exactly the people who don’t want that to happen. Consumerism-driven, wasteful capitalism is the in-built trend of capitalism itself, not an unfortunate variant - even government regulation doesn’t solve these problems.

“I was hoping for either Big Macs or [fast food] pizza. That would have been better than the food that we were served,” said Nicholas Pinto.

This is a depressing statement. Especially the first half.