US Politics Megathread

[Goodspeed]

Show hidden quotes

Maybe global warming is not that bad, since we could turn heat into energy using thermoelectric devices and use that energy for whatever is needed to deal with the effects of climate change.

If this is a serious post, then you disappoint me more than ever. If it is a troll post, then be better than playing into the delusion of the people that actually believe this.

Never heard of this before but why is this so stupid? Just a form of energy transfer like many others we do. Surely it's just a case of needing innovation to make it efficient on a large scale?

It's stupid because every argument for not doing anything about global warming is cost. The longer you wait, the more it costs, the faster innovation has to happen, the faster you have to mobilise, the greater disruption to society not to mention the continuing catastrophic disasters that will only grow in size and frequency plus the complete damage to the oceans and aquatic ecosystems.

Do you think it will be free to mass produce this form on energy transfer on a global scale that will reverse 3C of warming? It isn't going to get cheaper. Every proposal from here on out will only get more and more expensive as it will have to do more, in less time. Do you think it will bring back the lives lost in natural disasters? Will it instantly reverse ocean acidification? Also what will incentivise oil, coal and gas companies to invest in such an endeavour? These things take time. We are out of time. I don't think you realise just how bad 2C+ is. Once you start getting into 3-4C+ temps, there won't be an off switch, or a reverse switch.

Nonetheless you should trust the experts. Trust the people that have spent 5, 10, 15, 20+ years of their life studying this, putting their life blood into preventing this. The idea that this is even an argument is baffling. You go to the doctor to get your health advice. You go to an engineer to build a house.

The reason it's stupid is that warm air isn't a viable source of energy...

[Dolan]

Well then good luck trying to make China and India cut their emissions:



The only region that has been aggressively reducing carbon emissions is the EU. You need to put more pressure on China and India, whose emissions have been growing at a high rate, compared to previous years.
The USA also has a wobbly record, but at least they're not growing their emissions massively, like China and India.

[fightinfrenchman]

Show hidden quotes

Maybe global warming is not that bad, since we could turn heat into energy using thermoelectric devices and use that energy for whatever is needed to deal with the effects of climate change.

If this is a serious post, then you disappoint me more than ever. If it is a troll post, then be better than playing into the delusion of the people that actually believe this.

Never heard of this before but why is this so stupid? Just a form of energy transfer like many others we do. Surely it's just a case of needing innovation to make it efficient on a large scale?

It's stupid because every argument for not doing anything about global warming is cost. The longer you wait, the more it costs, the faster innovation has to happen, the faster you have to mobilise, the greater disruption to society not to mention the continuing catastrophic disasters that will only grow in size and frequency plus the complete damage to the oceans and aquatic ecosystems.

Do you think it will be free to mass produce this form on energy transfer on a global scale that will reverse 3C of warming? It isn't going to get cheaper. Every proposal from here on out will only get more and more expensive as it will have to do more, in less time. Do you think it will bring back the lives lost in natural disasters? Will it instantly reverse ocean acidification? Also what will incentivise oil, coal and gas companies to invest in such an endeavour? These things take time. We are out of time. I don't think you realise just how bad 2C+ is. Once you start getting into 3-4C+ temps, there won't be an off switch, or a reverse switch.

Nonetheless you should trust the experts. Trust the people that have spent 5, 10, 15, 20+ years of their life studying this, putting their life blood into preventing this. The idea that this is even an argument is baffling. You go to the doctor to get your health advice. You go to an engineer to build a house.

The reason it's stupid is that warm air isn't a viable source of energy...

This isn't quite fair, there are a lot of new innovations that can help give people cheap energy using the heat in the air:

spoiler

[Dolan]

Also, if you really want to feel like you're making a change, start checking everything you're buying and stop buying anything made in those countries that have the biggest carbon emissions (China, India, USA, etc). And start buying more from those regions that are cutting their emissions fast (like the EU).
You can be the change you want to see in the world.

[wardyb1]

Well then good luck trying to make China and India cut their emissions:



The only region that has been aggressively reducing carbon emissions is the EU. You need to put more pressure on China and India, whose emissions have been growing at a high rate, compared to previous years.

1. Just because 100 people litter doesn't mean it is right for a 101st person to litter. Every bit matters.
2. The US is historically responsible for 28.8% of all emissions ever emitted compared to China at 9% and India at 2.4%
3. If you look at consumption emissions the US is also 2nd in the world per person.

Now do these facts absolve China, India, Russia, the Middle East and anyone else from being responsible? No. But that is completely irrelevant to whether or not the US does anything. Everyone is going to have to act. The earlier the better.

[fightinfrenchman]

@wardyb1 Remember like 20 minutes ago when I told you you shouldn't get baited by dumb trolls, then you immediately continued to do that?

[Dolan]

@fightinfrenchman Stop buying anything made in China, bish.
You're the reason why climate change is happening, because you like to consoom lots of cheap stuff made in China.

[fightinfrenchman]

@fightinfrenchman Stop buying anything made in China, bish.
You're the reason why climate change is happening, because you like to consoom lots of cheap stuff made in China.

I actually prefer expensive stuff

[wardyb1]

@wardyb1 Remember like 20 minutes ago when I told you you shouldn't get baited by dumb trolls, then you immediately continued to do that?

I'm a dumb ape that likes notifications and stimuli. Kind of ironic after just watching The Social Dilemma.

[fightinfrenchman]

It's actually kind of worrisome to think that the people in charge of running our aircraft carriers are spending more time thinking about cocksucking than national security

[Dolan]

1. Just because 100 people litter doesn't mean it is right for a 101st person to litter. Every bit matters.
2. The US is historically responsible for 28.8% of all emissions ever emitted compared to China at 9% and India at 2.4%
3. If you look at consumption emissions the US is also 2nd in the world per person.

Now do these facts absolve China, India, Russia, the Middle East and anyone else from being responsible? No. But that is completely irrelevant to whether or not the US does anything. Everyone is going to have to act. The earlier the better.

Well, historically what does it matter really anymore. We have the breakdown in emissions that we have right now. And if you're looking at the stats, China is the biggest producer of carbon emissions. Every bit counts, yeah, but we also need to look at the dynamics, because that's how we understand which country is on the right path and which isn't. And if you look at the graph, which countries are increasing their emissions most right now? It's China and India.

And what are we doing about this? Complain more about the USA or the West, whose emissions have either stagnated or decreased (the EU). Why are people doing that? Because only in the West these "socially aware" whiny policies work, in those countries that are the biggest emitters this kind of campaigns falls on deaf ears.

[wardyb1]

1. Just because 100 people litter doesn't mean it is right for a 101st person to litter. Every bit matters.
2. The US is historically responsible for 28.8% of all emissions ever emitted compared to China at 9% and India at 2.4%
3. If you look at consumption emissions the US is also 2nd in the world per person.

Now do these facts absolve China, India, Russia, the Middle East and anyone else from being responsible? No. But that is completely irrelevant to whether or not the US does anything. Everyone is going to have to act. The earlier the better.

Well, historically what does it matter really anymore. We have the breakdown in emissions that we have right now. And if you're looking at the stats, China is the biggest producer of carbon emissions. Every bit counts, yeah, but we also need to look at the dynamics, because that's how we understand which country is on the right path and which isn't. And if you look at the graph, which countries are increasing their emissions most right now? It's China and India.

And what are we doing about this? Complain more about the USA or the West, whose emissions have either stagnated or decreased (the EU). Why are people doing that? Because only in the West these "socially aware" whiny policies work, in those countries that are the biggest emitters this kind of campaigns falls on deaf ears.

Historically 100% matters. We wouldn't be where we are without the US emissions. They have a responsibility for those emissions. They are the number one global superpower because of those emissions. Also how is it possible to change China or India when it is completely hypocritical when the US isn't doing anything as well? Also it is just good economic policy to move as early as possible. Everyone is going to have to change, by leading the way you can set yourself up as the global leader in green energy technology and manufacturing.

[Dolan]

OK, then I think we consumers can do something about this. We could start boycotting everything made in countries that are not cutting their emissions.
For example, we could stop using Netflix, Google, Amazon, Alibaba, any products and services made in China, India, USA and other countries that aren't doing enough efforts need to be boycotted.

We need to reward those countries that are part of the solution rather than part of the problem. You can speak with your wallet, by boycotting products made in countries that refuse to do enough to cut their emissions. You can help the world yourself, by only buying stuff from the countries/regions that are doing their part in cutting emissions.

[fightinfrenchman]

OK, then I think we consumers can do something about this. We could start boycotting everything made in countries that are not cutting their emissions.
For example, we could stop using Netflix, Google, Amazon, Alibaba, any products and services made in China, India, USA and other countries that aren't doing enough efforts need to be boycotted.

We need to reward those countries that are part of the solution rather than part of the problem. You can speak with your wallet, by boycotting products made in countries that refuse to do enough to cut their emissions.

I am publicly pledging to not use Alibaba going forward.

[Dolan]

That's the spirit.

[wardyb1]

Goalposts getting shifted in this thread faster than a Ben Shapiro speech.

[Amsel_]

OK, then I think we consumers can do something about this. We could start boycotting everything made in countries that are not cutting their emissions.
For example, we could stop using Netflix, Google, Amazon, Alibaba, any products and services made in China, India, USA and other countries that aren't doing enough efforts need to be boycotted.

We need to reward those countries that are part of the solution rather than part of the problem. You can speak with your wallet, by boycotting products made in countries that refuse to do enough to cut their emissions.

I am publicly pledging to not use Alibaba going forward.

But I make a bunch of money on their stock! Think of the consequences.

-This has been yet another post brought to you by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce

[Dolan]

Show hidden quotes

Maybe global warming is not that bad, since we could turn heat into energy using thermoelectric devices and use that energy for whatever is needed to deal with the effects of climate change.

If this is a serious post, then you disappoint me more than ever. If it is a troll post, then be better than playing into the delusion of the people that actually believe this.

Never heard of this before but why is this so stupid? Just a form of energy transfer like many others we do. Surely it's just a case of needing innovation to make it efficient on a large scale?

It's stupid because every argument for not doing anything about global warming is cost. The longer you wait, the more it costs, the faster innovation has to happen, the faster you have to mobilise, the greater disruption to society not to mention the continuing catastrophic disasters that will only grow in size and frequency plus the complete damage to the oceans and aquatic ecosystems.

Do you think it will be free to mass produce this form on energy transfer on a global scale that will reverse 3C of warming? It isn't going to get cheaper. Every proposal from here on out will only get more and more expensive as it will have to do more, in less time. Do you think it will bring back the lives lost in natural disasters? Will it instantly reverse ocean acidification? Also what will incentivise oil, coal and gas companies to invest in such an endeavour? These things take time. We are out of time. I don't think you realise just how bad 2C+ is. Once you start getting into 3-4C+ temps, there won't be an off switch, or a reverse switch.

Nonetheless you should trust the experts. Trust the people that have spent 5, 10, 15, 20+ years of their life studying this, putting their life blood into preventing this. The idea that this is even an argument is baffling. You go to the doctor to get your health advice. You go to an engineer to build a house.

And what are you exactly proposing? Who should specifically do what? Like tell me what needs to be done by using names, naming countries, companies, specific individuals, not generic and wishful thinking posts on a forum.

Which company needs to do what?
Which country needs to do what?
What exactly should consumers do?
How about start getting down to specifics, than spouting all this generic wishful thinking "we need to do this or that".

What have you been personally doing to stop climate change? I've started not buying products made in China.

[fightinfrenchman]

What have you been personally doing to stop climate change?

Cocksucking

[Dolan]

Goalposts getting shifted in this thread faster than a Ben Shapiro speech.

Goalposts getting shifted from what to what? What should actually happen and it doesn't and what happens and it shouldn't?
Is boycotting products made in countries that are carbon emission champions a bad policy?

[Amsel_]

Tbh if the economic damage of reducing carbon emissions is so worth it, the European Union should just reimburse America, India, and China for all the costs of going carbon-neutral. I'm sure they won't let greed get in the way of saving millions of lives and ensuring that our children have a beautiful world to live in. That would be selfish.

[Dolan]

That's the same level of foresight and reasoning as that of those NGO activists who propose we should let more and more migration from Africa into Europe, because they are poorer, so by moving them to Europe, we solve poverty.
So the way to solve poverty is to move them all to Europe and have Europe bear all the costs, because if Europe managed to reduce poverty in their own countries, then this means they're able to support any level of costs to remove poverty from any number of people.
It's the same level of reasoning.

[Amsel_]

That's the same level of foresight and reasoning as that of those NGO activists who propose we should let more and more migration from Africa into Europe, because they are poorer, so by moving them to Europe, we solve poverty.
So the way to solve poverty is to move them all to Europe and have Europe bear all the costs, because if Europe managed to reduce poverty in their own countries, then this means they're able to support any level of costs to remove poverty from any number of people.
It's the same level of reasoning.

Europe is a richer country so it can afford to pay more. That's progressivism! You first world Romanians don't know what it's like to live in a developing country like the United States. (We can't even afford our own healthcare!) Carbon reduction strategies as imagined by Brussels are agents of neo-imperialism that impoverish the rest of the world. It serves to exacerbate wealth inequality by setting strict carbon-output limits on countries without full regard for their economic status, political status, or cultural norms that may impair their ability to reduce carbon outputs with the ease at which Europeans can. It's time that we think about the little guy, about the third-worlders in Congo, in Panama, and in Canada. These people aren't bank accounts. They're people! And it's time we put humanity first, and we need to do so if we're going to combat climate change. But we don't be able to get over that until the Europeans stop being selfish and decide to contribute their fair-share towards combating climate change, as they have been historically privileged which has now given them the ability to reduce carbon emissions with less loss than other countries.

[Goodspeed]

What have you been personally doing to stop climate change?

Cocksucking

The fuck is this meme?

[voigt1240]

I just miss snow :[