29s Politics thread

[Donteventrii]

Franchi, you are too simplistic. I'm a Science major, but I have class in 20 minutes. Be back for this later.

 

[Franchi]

Franchi, you are too simplistic. I'm a Science major, but I have class in 20 minutes. Be back for this later.

I eagerly await your professors opinion rehashed into your words.



"It is a poor sort of man who is content to be spoon feed knowledge" LL

 

[Donteventrii]

I eagerly await your professors opinion rehashed into your words.



"It is a poor sort of man who is content to be spoon feed knowledge" LL

How should we classify your opinion? Conservative media rehashed into low-information voter directed sentiments?



Vibrant + Bionix + Bali

 

[Falkor]

hah franchi. nature has a way of replenishing oil reserves? sure maybe after another few billion years and the right conditions....not in this or any near timeline. and yea maybe another huge ass rain forest will spring up over night too, but i wont be holding my breath for that either.

environmental problems =/= global warming always. poisoning our limited fresh water supply with toxic runoff, turning the ocean into one big floating junk yard, throwing out recycable materials which takes up more landfill space, which means more landfills which means less room for us and less natural untainted land for future people, depleting the ozone layer, launching our crap into space and making a mess up there, it goes on and on and doesnt even have to do with global warming, cooling, or anything like that



biodiesel aka e85 is horribly inefficient, in combustion and the fact it forces farmers to grow more corn for it. the subsidies are a joke



plus i love how people like you assume people in college have liberal professors and that the students just suck down everything they say with no critical thinking of their own, no reading material outside of class, or anything like that. but wait, do you even have professors? or do you just tune into right wing nut jobs who spout the word pin head every two seconds and get a holier than thou feeling bashing "libtards", even though youve never sat inside a college classroom much less one focused in politics

 

[Franchi]

hah franchi. nature has a way of replenishing oil reserves? sure maybe after another few billion years and the right conditions....not in this or any near timeline. and yea maybe another huge ass rain forest will spring up over night too, but i wont be holding my breath for that either.

environmental problems =/= global warming always. poisoning our limited fresh water supply with toxic runoff, turning the ocean into one big floating junk yard, throwing out recycable materials which takes up more landfill space, which means more landfills which means less room for us and less natural untainted land for future people, depleting the ozone layer, launching our crap into space and making a mess up there, it goes on and on and doesnt even have to do with global warming, cooling, or anything like that

Well then sell it as such and stop with the scare tactics about global warming eh? When the message as sold to the people is a lie they will eventually question it, i have no problem with recycling, no problem with more efficient packaging methods, no problem with regulations on toxic waste, and no problem wiht regulations on dumping garbage. I have a problem with "carbon credits" and all that bullshit.



And no I'm not talking about the oil reserves replenishing themselves. I'm pointing out that the ecosystem will balance itself out unless we bork it beyond all recognition. People love to talk about de-forestation, well that's mainly a third world problem, please read Survival Primer .



as to land fills

What Happens to Mixed Recycling - YouTube

There is a company in Asia (I am trying to get the video of their operation), basically this company buys loads of garbage (landfill type stuff), and sorts and recycles it, then cycles all the water that has been used (after purification processes) through their coy pond.



But please carry on with your whining about a problem we already have the solution to instead of becoming part of the solution and starting up such an operation if it really matters to you. You and I both know you wont, you would rather bitch about a problem then engage in a profitable solution to it.

biodiesel aka e85 is horribly inefficient, in combustion and the fact it forces farmers to grow more corn for it. the subsidies are a joke

I'm sure you didn't know this but i grew up in and around agriculture. I have been actively involved in it for most of my life and i can tell you that the government subsidies for agriculture are set up in the most retarded way imaginable and that they make almost no sense when it comes to whats actually best, the one possible exception to this is NRCS, they do some nice work and encourage farmers and ranchers to use land more efficiently, but then even they pay out vast sums of money on do nothing projects in case you can't figure it out that's more government waste that could be cut instead of raising taxes.



Yes bio diesel is a joke yes its horribly inefficient as a fuel, on the other hand alcohol is a wonderful fuel that has been used for years, and guess what you can make it out of darn near anything. I am not saying that we could or should replace fossil fuels with those options today or tomorrow, but I am sick of hearing how there is no option asside from solar wind and hydro electric for the future once we run out of fossil fuels.

plus i love how people like you assume people in college have liberal professors and that the students just suck down everything they say with no critical thinking of their own, no reading material outside of class, or anything like that. but wait, do you even have professors? or do you just tune into right wing nut jobs who spout the word pin head every two seconds and get a holier than thou feeling bashing "libtards", even though you've never sat inside a college classroom much less one focused in politics

I attended college, to call those professors liberals and not socialists would be a major miss categorization. I attended 2 different "real" colleges, and one trade school, lowest gpa 3.87. I loaded up on history/political science classes when I didn't need the credit hours for something else. I would wager that Maybe 10% of my fellow students read anything in college outside of required materials, the rest were to busy getting drunk or high or laid.

 

[Donteventrii]

ah yes global warming, what a beut that, funny how those who decried it as a sham were and still are ridiculed despite the fact that the model they supported is the one that predicted the current cooling trend. I know, I know consensus is more important than actual science, that's where you poly sci majors always **** yourself and the rest of us along with you.

98% of climate scientists affirm that anthropogenic climate change is occurring. Right wing media in the U.S. denies this, and gives equal coverage of reports that have been quite literally bought out by free market think tanks. Facts are facts. ACC is not a political issue. It's a scientific one. Conservative media has brought the realm of politics into play by crowing about the economic implications. But ACC is occurring, and the rest of the world is attempting to step up to the challenge and slow it down. But when the second largest emitter decides to ignore the science, they are playing at an economic disadvantage.



Here is something you, nor your conservative news source can't deny- ocean acidification. The PH levels in our oceans are decreasing. Our oceans are essentially a carbon sink. Over half of the carbon emitted by fossil fuel combustion now resides in them. The ocean is now 30% more acidic than it was in pre-industrial times. Whole ecosystems are collapsing- livelihoods of millions of people are being stressed. Who is paying for this negative externality? FREE MARKETS HAVE FAILED.



Rain forests are 50% gone. Over 1/3 of all arable lands have been depleted because of high-till farming practices. Every year, a dead zone the size of new jersey erupts in the gulf below Louisiana and Alabama due to fertilizer stimulating the growth of algae. The dead zone in the Chesapeake this past summer was it's largest ever. An 83 mile stretch of uninhabitable water by organisms. Entire species- billions of years of hard working natural selection of productive genes are being wiped out an an exponential pace.



We are literally choking the life out of our planet. But who will feel the effects first? Not us. It will be the third world. But who put us into this mess? The developed world.



The free market has failed to produce a sustainable society because individuals and firms, like any economist says, choose their own short term self interest over the long term viability of society. For this reason, socialism is the answer.

 

[Franchi]

98% of climate scientists affirm that anthropogenic climate change is occurring. Right wing media in the U.S. denies this, and gives equal coverage of reports that have been quite literally bought out by free market think tanks. Facts are facts. ACC is not a political issue. It's a scientific one. Conservative media has brought the realm of politics into play by crowing about the economic implications. But ACC is occurring, and the rest of the world is attempting to step up to the challenge and slow it down. But when the second largest emitter decides to ignore the science, they are playing at an economic disadvantage.

Actually it is a political issue when scientists need to justify the grants that they receive from the government and insure those grants continue into the future.



Consensus again means nothing. Consensus is not science.



What facts exactly?

Here is something you, nor your conservative news source can't deny- ocean acidification. The PH levels in our oceans are decreasing. Our oceans are essentially a carbon sink. Over half of the carbon emitted by fossil fuel combustion now resides in them. The ocean is now 300% more acidic than it was in pre-industrial times. Whole ecosystems are collapsing- livelihoods of millions of people are being stressed. Who is paying for this negative externality? FREE MARKETS HAVE FAILED.

300% eh? made up statistics are FUN.



BTW the breakdown on carbon emissions absorbed by water is closer to 25% of said emissions, but again why let facts or science get in the way of your agenda?

Rain forests are 50% gone. Over 1/3 of all arable lands have been depleted because of high-till farming practices. Every year, a dead zone the size of new jersey erupts in the gulf below Louisiana and Alabama due to fertilizer stimulating the growth of algae. The dead zone in the Chesapeake this past summer was it's largest ever. An 83 mile stretch of uninhabitable water by organisms. Entire species- billions of years of hard working natural selection of productive genes are being wiped out an an exponential pace.

Hmm rain forests 50% gonna and still the only place we have serious air pollution problems is oh surprise surprise major population centers.



Algal blooms AKA red tides are not a new phenomenon and in fact PRE DATE the industrial age and in all likely hood pre date mankind, the actual cause of this is unknown and there are far to many factors involved to say that it is caused by agricultural contaminants, but hey I get it you're an environmental scientist you can just ignore any data that doesn't fit the results you are trying to obtain.

We are literally choking the life out of our planet. But who will feel the effects first? Not us. It will be the third world. But who put us into this mess? The developed world.

Where again is the rain forest that you decry the destruction of? oh that's right the third world where they are hacking slashing and burning it in an attempt to make something of their countries yes there is a lot of first world pillaging going on at the same time, but eh what you gonna do? take it up with the world court? As far as us not feeling the pinch before they do, take a look at the amount of food we ship to the third world every year, now lets see if you have your way we won't use fertilizer, we won't use high production farming practices and bam we won't export our excess food to other countries either in sales or the practice of giving it away in the form of aid.



I know American agricultural excellence contributing to the fight to stop world hunger and promote world peace? FOR SHAME!



So if you are right the third world gets screwed either way.

The free market has failed to produce a sustainable society because individuals and firms, like any economist says, choose their own short term self interest over the long term viability of society. For this reason, socialism is the answer.

Remind me again how socialism changes human nature?



And now we go back to: are government chartered banks fulfilling their charters and under pressure from government officials to make bad decisions free enterprises or not.

 

[Falkor]

Well then sell it as such and stop with the scare tactics about global warming eh? When the message as sold to the people is a lie they will eventually question it, i have no problem with recycling, no problem with more efficient packaging methods, no problem with regulations on toxic waste, and no problem wiht regulations on dumping garbage. I have a problem with "carbon credits" and all that bullshit.

most of the lies are coming from privately commissioned reports by right wing people polluting the science. as of now i know of no scientific consensus, but much of that is b/c outside sources are forcing results that may or may not be true. and thats great you have no problem with more efficient packaging methods, etc. but a real free market capitalist WOULD b/c without a strong federal govt overseeing them and regulating them a capitalist would take the cheapest method to save a penny, nay a fraction of a penny, and take the inefficient, pollutant, method.

carbon credits are bullshit, and i dont like them either. but thats a free market situation where entrapenures make websites that say they'll do X if you pay them Y, if youre a free market capitalist you cant hate on them for that. if you acknowledge free market capitalism is flawed b/c of human nature then you'll come around

And no I'm not talking about the oil reserves replenishing themselves. I'm pointing out that the ecosystem will balance itself out unless we bork it beyond all recognition. People love to talk about de-forestation, well that's mainly a third world problem, please read Survival Primer.

the ecosystem cant balance itself out with more pollutants coming in than being taken care of naturally. it leads to an imbalance which leads to issues that affect humans such as ozone depletion, rain forests being removed - which leads to less o2 produced, entire species being extinct, etc. deforestation is a problem happening in the 3rd world, which will have 1st world reprocussions. denying that is a joke

as to land fills

What Happens to Mixed Recycling - YouTube

There is a company in Asia (I am trying to get the video of their operation), basically this company buys loads of garbage (landfill type stuff), and sorts and recycles it, then cycles all the water that has been used (after purification processes) through their coy pond.

id love to see the video youre looking for, then someone actually going there and seeing that they're doing this, instead of taking the garbage and just dumping it into the ocean. asia is coming to love capitalism, even china is partially capitalist now....so, with all your polit classes im sure youve heard of the race to the bottom....whats stopping them from buying our trash dirt cheap, possibly recycling a few things to turn a profit, then dumping all the rest? human nature and capitalism would suggest that's exactly their plan. but youre content with that until absolute concrete proof shows up they've ****ed our ecosystem beyond a doubt....at which point theres nothing we could do to fix it 'cept kiss our asses g'bye

But please carry on with your whining about a problem we already have the solution to instead of becoming part of the solution and starting up such an operation if it really matters to you. You and I both know you wont, you would rather bitch about a problem then engage in a profitable solution to it.

but please show me actually evidence there is a REAL solution to our problem, instead of just blindly trusting some random asian country with being able to solve all our problems in one neat little solution that will never come back to bite the whole human population in the ass. we both know you'd rather turn a blind eye to the problem than do anything about it

I'm sure you didn't know this but i grew up in and around agriculture. I have been actively involved in it for most of my life and i can tell you that the government subsidies for agriculture are set up in the most retarded way imaginable and that they make almost no sense when it comes to whats actually best, the one possible exception to this is NRCS, they do some nice work and encourage farmers and ranchers to use land more efficiently, but then even they pay out vast sums of money on do nothing projects in case you can't figure it out that's more government waste that could be cut instead of raising taxes.

i grew up all around ag. in illinois and the midwest - our bread basket. and i agree subsidies are set up in a ****ed up way......but do you know why that happened? cuz farmers are dumb ****s who dont have enough money, so they turn to the govt for subsidary bailout money when they need it in return for growing what they wish. take away subsidies and the free market starts to collapse when they cant pay for their equpiment, seeds, workers, etc. look to the root cause b4 blaming the govt for trying to prevent a problem

Yes bio diesel is a joke yes its horribly inefficient as a fuel, on the other hand alcohol is a wonderful fuel that has been used for years, and guess what you can make it out of darn near anything. I am not saying that we could or should replace fossil fuels with those options today or tomorrow, but I am sick of hearing how there is no option asside from solar wind and hydro electric for the future once we run out of fossil fuels.

...you can make alcohol from corn....thats not the issue. however the free market is not willing to invest all the money in r&d n technology for alcohol or other tech when they can stick to the same ol same ol. the free market businesses would never search for another reasonable solution unless a gun is pointed at their head - that gun either being the oil peak, or govt subsidies forcing research; pick your poison

I attended college, to call those professors liberals and not socialists would be a major miss categorization. I attended 2 different "real" colleges, and one trade school, lowest gpa 3.87. I loaded up on history/political science classes when I didn't need the credit hours for something else. I would wager that Maybe 10% of my fellow students read anything in college outside of required materials, the rest were to busy getting drunk or high or laid.

well you went to a shitty college then. a decent professor would not force their opinions down your throat...they'd engage your critical thinking to form your own opinions, so i feel sorry for you. and its too bad only 10% of your peers did any outside reading to form their own opinions on subjects, but you cant extrapolate that to 10% of all college students and say that everyone just takes their profs words as fact and doesnt do any outside thinking.

Actually it is a political issue when scientists need to justify the grants that they receive from the government and insure those grants continue into the future.



Consensus again means nothing. Consensus is not science.

....so...then look at all the institutes that took money under bush, and right leaning private organizations, to grasp at straws to prove that global warming isnt/wasnt happening

and use your colleges resources to look at scientific data bases and find the real facts and not things that people bought

Where again is the rain forest that you decry the destruction of? oh that's right the third world where they are hacking slashing and burning it in an attempt to make something of their countries yes there is a lot of first world pillaging going on at the same time, but eh what you gonna do?

the rain forest decay in brazil and other parts of south america where its occuring. and yea, guess what they're doing it out of the free market principles we forced down their throats......and the decay occurring in the 3rd world doesnt mean it wont have 1st world/world wide implications.

And now we go back to: are government chartered banks fulfilling their charters and under pressure from government officials to make bad decisions free enterprises or not.

now we go back to the problem with free market banks ****ing over the us and the world economy by being lying sons of bitches too worried with their own personal gains than the economy as a whole. have you studied the 2008 recession, and everything since then, at all? clearly not

 

[Donteventrii]

Only idiots argue with idiots. I concede.

 

[Druiddroid]

I'm just going to keep agreeing with Falkor and not reading anything

 

[Franchi]

most of the lies are coming from privately commissioned reports by right wing people polluting the science. as of now i know of no scientific consensus, but much of that is b/c outside sources are forcing results that may or may not be true. and thats great you have no problem with more efficient packaging methods, etc. but a real free market capitalist WOULD b/c without a strong federal govt overseeing them and regulating them a capitalist would take the cheapest method to save a penny, nay a fraction of a penny, and take the inefficient, pollutant, method.

carbon credits are bullshit, and i dont like them either. but thats a free market situation where entrapenures make websites that say they'll do X if you pay them Y, if youre a free market capitalist you cant hate on them for that. if you acknowledge free market capitalism is flawed b/c of human nature then you'll come around

More efficient packaging methods are cheaper. What you think the companies making bottled water and beer started using thinner can's and bottles cause they give a damn about the environment? You think meat packers turned to thinner packaging that leads to freezer burn because they were worried about the environment? No they do it cause its cheaper. Capitalism is flawed because of human nature but so is socialism. I never said i want pure capitalism, nasty on the other hand decided to state that he is a socialist with no qualifiers.



It's a shame that you cannot see how Carbon credits fuel the enviro science world, yeah it turns out when you dig deep enough you discover that nasty evil capitalists are paying for both sides of the debate!

the ecosystem cant balance itself out with more pollutants coming in than being taken care of naturally. it leads to an imbalance which leads to issues that affect humans such as ozone depletion, rain forests being removed - which leads to less o2 produced, entire species being extinct, etc. deforestation is a problem happening in the 3rd world, which will have 1st world reprocussions. denying that is a joke

Remember a couple of years back when all the enviro nuts were jumping up and down and patting themselves on the back about the hole in the ozone layer shrinking and going on and on about how it was cause we had banned CFC's a few years earlier? Remember how they all shut up and backtracked on the hole getting smaller as soon as someone pointed out how long it took for those CFC'c to reach the ozone layer to begin with?There is the issue with the environmental movement and it's "science", they go in with an outcome already in mind and ignore anything that indicates they are wrong, that IS NOT science.



Again how is de-forestation a political issue for America? We can't do a damn thing about it.

id love to see the video you're looking for, then someone actually going there and seeing that they're doing this, instead of taking the garbage and just dumping it into the ocean. Asia is coming to love capitalism, even china is partially capitalist now....so, with all your polit classes I'm sure you've heard of the race to the bottom....whats stopping them from buying our trash dirt cheap, possibly recycling a few things to turn a profit, then dumping all the rest? human nature and capitalism would suggest that's exactly their plan. but youre content with that until absolute concrete proof shows up they've ****ed our ecosystem beyond a doubt....at which point there's nothing we could do to fix it 'cept kiss our asses g'bye

but please show me actually evidence there is a REAL solution to our problem, instead of just blindly trusting some random asian country with being able to solve all our problems in one neat little solution that will never come back to bite the whole human population in the ass. we both know you'd rather turn a blind eye to the problem than do anything about it

Well there is a plant doing the same thing (minus the koi) being built about 15 miles north of where i live, if you want i can give you updates on it after it gets finished.



But yeah rather than trying to find a real world solution you can keep bitching about it we understand that's what you really want to do anyway.

i grew up all around ag. in Illinois and the midwest - our bread basket. and i agree subsidies are set up in a ****ed up way......but do you know why that happened? cuz farmers are dumb ****s who dont have enough money, so they turn to the govt for subsidary bailout money when they need it in return for growing what they wish. take away subsidies and the free market starts to collapse when they cant pay for their equpiment, seeds, workers, etc. look to the root cause b4 blaming the govt for trying to prevent a problem

Successful farming and ranching operations do it one of two ways, they either have massive cash reserves or run massive debts in bad years. Yeah the ones running it on debt are dumb, and yeah they collapse without government subsidies, on the other hand the massive farming conglomerates make bank on said subsidies while small time farmers need them to just get by in bad years. Now why have so many moved away from the cash reserve model to the massive debt model? Well its largely tied to the government subsidies and the mentality that they and most forms of well fare bring to anything.

...you can make alcohol from corn....thats not the issue. however the free market is not willing to invest all the money in r&d n technology for alcohol or other tech when they can stick to the same ol same ol. the free market businesses would never search for another reasonable solution unless a gun is pointed at their head - that gun either being the oil peak, or govt subsidies forcing research; pick your poison

Or it could be a profitable alternative, that tends to draw in capitalists like shit draws flies. As i said earlier until we get closer to running out of oil no one will care about corn and other bio fuel sources because oil is easy, oil is cheap (comparatively) and the infrastructure to make diesel and gasoline is already in place.

well you went to a shitty college then. a decent professor would not force their opinions down your throat...they'd engage your critical thinking to form your own opinions, so i feel sorry for you. and its too bad only 10% of your peers did any outside reading to form their own opinions on subjects, but you cant extrapolate that to 10% of all college students and say that everyone just takes their profs words as fact and doesnt do any outside thinking.

They didn't necessarily ram it down your throat. On the other hand who called em out on it in class? Just a few individuals and most of them were right wing nut cases. Hell I got along fine with most of them, they enjoyed a student who debated them, but half the time i just kept my mouth shut cause some idiot wanted to stand up and go on and on about biblical law or biblical precedent or some other bullshit i didn't want to be associated with.

....so...then look at all the institutes that took money under bush, and right leaning private organizations, to grasp at straws to prove that global warming isnt/wasnt happening

and use your colleges resources to look at scientific data bases and find the real facts and not things that people bought

You mean like nasty adding an extra 0 to the the end of the increase in ocean acidification lvls? or doubling the amount of carbon emissions actually absorbed by water?



Yeah sure thing bro the environmental science crowd is totally blameless when it comes to junk science based on an agenda.

the rain forest decay in brazil and other parts of south america where its occuring. and yea, guess what they're doing it out of the free market principles we forced down their throats......and the decay occurring in the 3rd world doesnt mean it wont have 1st world/world wide implications.

Couldn't have anything to do with them wanting to feed their growing populations now could it? It's got to be the evil first world with shadowy hands all the time right?

now we go back to the problem with free market banks ****ing over the us and the world economy by being lying sons of bitches too worried with their own personal gains than the economy as a whole. have you studied the 2008 recession, and everything since then, at all? clearly not

Have you studied the rise and fall of fannie and freddie? Clearly not.

Only idiots argue with idiots. I concede.

Only desperate individuals with a political agenda make up or alter statistics and facts on the spot to try and win an internet argument.

 

[Donteventrii]

I edited it to reflect ocean acidification being 30%. Regardless, the free market does not capture all costs of transaction. When externalities are present, the very basis of the free market system- all transactions being consensual among affected parties, breaks down. Capitalism will doom the human race at large, albeit not in the short time frame that the developed world lives in.

 

[Franchi]

I edited it to reflect ocean acidification being 30%. Regardless, the free market does not capture all costs of transaction. When externalities are present, the very basis of the free market system- all transactions being consensual among affected parties, breaks down. Capitalism will doom the human race at large, albeit not in the short time frame that the developed world lives in.

And how is socialism better????



What does socialism change about human nature????

 

[Donteventrii]

And how is socialism better????



What does socialism change about human nature????

When intelligent officials are elected by an educated and active electorate, socialism limits greed and redirects society to more sustainable and equitable ends. Socialism puts logistic limits on greed, discouraging behavior that promotes it.

 

[Franchi]

When intelligent officials are elected by an educated and active electorate, socialism limits greed and redirects society to more sustainable and equitable ends. Socialism puts logistic limits on greed, discouraging behavior that promotes it.

ROFLMAO



Cause the officials we have elected in the past are intelligent and have made such wonderful decisions?



take a look at what socialism has offered the world every where else, no matter how well intentioned it begins it always ends the same way.



Read Animal Farm by George Orwell.



There will always be pig's faking their belief in the system to get to the top and the ruling class in a socialist society ALWAYS lives better than the people.



You would exchange one corrupt form of government for another equally corruptible form of government.

 

[Falkor]

Again how is de-forestation a political issue for America? We can't do a damn thing about it.

b/c atm were still a superpower in this world and we can try to sway them. and its a political issue b/c we're the ones who mucked around in south america for decades pushing our flawed democratic and free market ideas down their throats. so we can certainly try to undo it. especially when ruining the rain forest has global implications; its not just a 3rd world problem

Well there is a plant doing the same thing (minus the koi) being built about 15 miles north of where i live, if you want i can give you updates on it after it gets finished.

that'd be lovely

Or it could be a profitable alternative, that tends to draw in capitalists like shit draws flies. As i said earlier until we get closer to running out of oil no one will care about corn and other bio fuel sources because oil is easy, oil is cheap (comparatively) and the infrastructure to make diesel and gasoline is already in place.

i agree. but waiting till the end is a stupid thing to do, why wait to see everything collapse when we're out of oil, why not plan ahead. use govt grant money to start some r&d since capitalists are content with the status quo. why do you think it took so long for the auto companies to stop sandbagging electric and other types of cars?

You mean like nasty adding an extra 0 to the the end of the increase in ocean acidification lvls? or doubling the amount of carbon emissions actually absorbed by water?

but he's not a scientist. and he went back, found the source, and amended his statement. fudging happens on both sides when private money comes into play, which is always dangerous. however i find the right pushing a bit harder since they dont want to hear things like their industries are ****ing the environment beyond repair and need to stop, b/c that would mean *gasp* regulation, and changing equipment, dumping, cleanup fees, etc.

Couldn't have anything to do with them wanting to feed their growing populations now could it? It's got to be the evil first world with shadowy hands all the time right?

of course they want to do that. but they "learned" from us ever since we starting forcing our sphere of influence into south america. so we are an evil first world at times with plenty of shadowy hands...denying that is a joke. we can pressure them to use more sustainable methods, to find other arable land, or any other number of solutions to prevent permantly ridding the world of the rain forest and all its inhabitants.

Have you studied the rise and fall of fannie and freddie? Clearly not.

yea i have. are you suggesting govt run institutions are worse than free market ones? when the greedy free market investment firms were the ones ****ing us raw and they knew it. then they had the balls to look for bailouts, and the govt had no choice but to do it or see the collapse of ours and the worlds econ. now theyre even bigger so next time shit hits the fan were even more ****ed. and they're the assholes who pushed for so much deregulation and still dont want regulation, or people saying they cant get multimillion dollar bonuses for willingly raping us. the most ****ed part is tho, that the same captain dumbasses of industry that nearly wreck us somehow wind up with jobs in the govt advising the pres. and other leaders, running the fed, treasury, etc. they should be ostracized for being so bad at what they do

 

[Franchi]

b/c atm were still a superpower in this world and we can try to sway them. and its a political issue b/c we're the ones who mucked around in south america for decades pushing our flawed democratic and free market ideas down their throats. so we can certainly try to undo it. especially when ruining the rain forest has global implications; its not just a 3rd world problem

So the united states and the soviet union upended everyone's sand box during the cold war, we are still suffering the after affects of that BTW, and you want America to once again attempt to dictate policy to foreign governments? Sounds grand lets just spawn another generation of terrorists.

that'd be lovely

will do. provided i remember lol.

i agree. but waiting till the end is a stupid thing to do, why wait to see everything collapse when we're out of oil, why not plan ahead. use govt grant money to start some r&d since capitalists are content with the status quo. why do you think it took so long for the auto companies to stop sandbagging electric and other types of cars?

Because electric cars are expensive as hell to operate and repair? Because the electricity for those cars comes primarily from COAL and therefore the carbon footprint of those cars is not much of an improvement over a gasoline powered car? Because the batteries required to make those cars are made from a material that has to be mined and mining that material is one of the most destructive and ecologically damaging practices that man kind has yet discovered?



P.S. GM sand bagged that wonderful electric car program back in the day because the cars were ridiculously expansive to maintain and had shit for range. Also the American public spoke loud and clear with their wallets when ford and others made small economic cars, they said "We want big, safe gas guzzling cars".

but he's not a scientist. and he went back, found the source, and amended his statement. fudging happens on both sides when private money comes into play, which is always dangerous. however i find the right pushing a bit harder since they dont want to hear things like their industries are ****ing the environment beyond repair and need to stop, b/c that would mean *gasp* regulation, and changing equipment, dumping, cleanup fees, etc.

He still hasn't amended it to be entirely correct, and that's fairly typical of the environmental movement, they inflate statistics, bend studies and flat out lie to scare people into agreement.

of course they want to do that. but they "learned" from us ever since we starting forcing our sphere of influence into south america. so we are an evil first world at times with plenty of shadowy hands...denying that is a joke. we can pressure them to use more sustainable methods, to find other arable land, or any other number of solutions to prevent permanently ridding the world of the rain forest and all its inhabitants.

Again any pressure we exert anywhere in the world will offend someone, many of those people we offend and many of the people we back end up turning on us in the end. Is the answer to do nothing? i don't think so, on the other hand any pressure we attempt to apply needs to be thought out and well considered, and trying to tell people that they should starve rather than rape and pillage the rainforest wont get us anything but enemies around the world. the populations in most 3rd world countries are on the rise and will continue to rise so they will need more arable land regardless of the methods being used, destroying the rain forest is the easiest way for them to get that land. Exporting the food that we can and do grow in such abundance has some affect in slowing down that destruction, but even that just leads to a larger need for it because a population that has available food grows faster.



So please in what way can we influence the third world to slow it down that will not just piss them off in the end?

yea i have. are you suggesting govt run institutions are worse than free market ones? when the greedy free market investment firms were the ones ****ing us raw and they knew it. then they had the balls to look for bailouts, and the govt had no choice but to do it or see the collapse of ours and the worlds econ. now theyre even bigger so next time shit hits the fan were even more ****ed. and they're the assholes who pushed for so much deregulation and still dont want regulation, or people saying they cant get multimillion dollar bonuses for willingly raping us. the most ****ed part is tho, that the same captain dumbasses of industry that nearly wreck us somehow wind up with jobs in the govt advising the pres. and other leaders, running the fed, treasury, etc. they should be ostracized for being so bad at what they do

Those free market firms were allowed to **** us and in fact were encouraged to **** us by both political parties.



Ever consider that you don't get taken into an administration unless you have something they need or did a favor for them?



Step back look at the big picture.

 

[Donteventrii]

ROFLMAO



Cause the officials we have elected in the past are intelligent and have made such wonderful decisions?



take a look at what socialism has offered the world every where else, no matter how well intentioned it begins it always ends the same way.



Read Animal Farm by George Orwell.



There will always be pig's faking their belief in the system to get to the top and the ruling class in a socialist society ALWAYS lives better than the people.



You would exchange one corrupt form of government for another equally corruptible form of government.

What? Both Roosevelt's changed things for the better. Regardless, history is not necessarily bound by universal law to repeat itself. (And thankfully so, currently the wealth disparity in the world is only rivaled by the middle ages). We can do better. With instant universal exchange of information and communication we can know what is happening at all times at any part of government at any place. It will require vigilance by a an intelligent citizenry who actively participate in government- as they should. That doesn't mean showing up to vote every year. That means devoting an hour out of ones day to pay attention to their elected officials. To attend local town meetings, to participate actively in the state politics. Is this outside the scope of many citizens willingness to inform themselves? Yes it is. And it's exactly why the system is so ****ed up right now.

People are lazy, and current politicians/corporations depend on it. By forcing social regulations on them, perhaps they will wake up.

 

[Falkor]

Because electric cars are expensive as hell to operate and repair? Because the electricity for those cars comes primarily from COAL and therefore the carbon footprint of those cars is not much of an improvement over a gasoline powered car? Because the batteries required to make those cars are made from a material that has to be mined and mining that material is one of the most destructive and ecologically damaging practices that man kind has yet discovered?

ofc theyre expensive now, and back then, b/c it was a new tech. and the capitalists were happy with how things were, so they didnt want to invest. but they shouldve.

coal doesnt matter b/c they could have been expanding clean energy at the same time and started weening off oil/coal

batteries schmatteries. even if there was no other solution to storing the energy than li or nicd or w/e the hell the car batteries are nowadays, im sure it woulda been better than 40 years of mining for oil, all the ecological disasters associated with that field, etc. and eventually more research could possible yield better battery tech than what we even have now, or a whole different solution all together

P.S. GM sand bagged that wonderful electric car program back in the day because the cars were ridiculously expansive to maintain and had shit for range. Also the American public spoke loud and clear with their wallets when ford and others made small economic cars, they said "We want big, safe gas guzzling cars".

shit range doesnt mean they should have stopped r&d....especially when the oil "crisis" those ragheads caused back in the 70s hit, effing opec. right then and there private firms and the govt should have gone hard into electric or alternative energy/travel. but we sat back and decided not to. big "safe" gas guzzling cars served no purpose. and if the market shifted from those the public would have had no choice but to embrace the future and not cling to inefficient crap. another problem caused by greed and keeping the status quo

 

[Franchi]

What? Both Roosevelt's changed things for the better. Regardless, history is not necessarily bound by universal law to repeat itself. (And thankfully so, currently the wealth disparity in the world is only rivaled by the middle ages). We can do better. With instant universal exchange of information and communication we can know what is happening at all times at any part of government at any place. It will require vigilance by a an intelligent citizenry who actively participate in government- as they should. That doesn't mean showing up to vote every year. That means devoting an hour out of ones day to pay attention to their elected officials. To attend local town meetings, to participate actively in the state politics. Is this outside the scope of many citizens willingness to inform themselves? Yes it is. And it's exactly why the system is so ****ed up right now.

People are lazy, and current politicians/corporations depend on it. By forcing social regulations on them, perhaps they will wake up.

We have gone so far beyond What Theodore Roosevelt stood for that I find it vaguely offensive that you would use his names and achievements in such a manner especially along side that of a fifth cousin who apposed him in favor of Woodrow Wilson (who gave us the FED) to advance his own political agenda.



FDR on the other hand well lets see his new deal did much what stimulus one and two did, band-aid the economy. But as this relates to today for Obama there isn't another world war looming to crank up the military industrial complex and once again give us full statistical employment. Under FDR we were going into ANOTHER recession until republicans rested control of the government from him, then off course we engaged in world war two and BAM no more depression. I'm not arguing that war is the way to build an economy but total war in a modern society WILL grow the economy. History, good stuff.



What was that about history not repeating itself????



The day i trust my fellow citizens to police and monitor the government please shoot me.