Like, I mean, I suppose you could try and win an argument with an ad hominem attack, falsely claiming that the reportage of facts is "hate," but it's not very convincing. You still haven't addressed the false dichotomies of your first comment, and we haven't even talked about the fact that you're entirely misconstruing my position re: the involvement of government in our lives.

Re: solving earth's problems... well, we've sponsored five refugee families, fundraised enough to feed thousands in India during Covid, loaned multi-five-figure interest-free money to over 300 third world entrepreneurs, we don't buy new cars/electronics, we shop at a walkable-distance organic farm market, we don't have any stock holdings because the Fortune 500 is so wildly corrupt, I've directed four documentaries on subjects like human trafficking, we've helped get two laws changed in Canada to protect vulnerable people groups, I've published four books, and I run a corruption-reporting blog that gets 2+ million views per year.

But you sadly seem more interested in defending billionaires and trolling writers than good-faith engagement.

But, you know what they say: "Think small, be small."