Ok, this global warming shit is getting out of hand...

[neufox47]

you are not dense you are just being dense. you have to give people a seat at the table and let them figure it out. i bet they could come up with a better plan than one that protects privilege.

it's hilarious you think other people wanting to survive just like the white male predators and their hangers on is akin to communist revolution.

"correct political thinkers?" that's just a pathetic and sad and lazy "interpretation" and not remotely what she was saying.

How does a carbon tax protect privilege? Incentivizing innovation? Incentivizing implementation, sure, but I have no idea how you build massive amounts of energy production, distribution, and transportation without massive groups of highly technical people, who are led in a specific direction, and have access to capital. It's never been done, ever.

She is literally talking about completely changing the political structure, culture, the economy, etc. then that will somehow fix climate change. That is literally what the leaders of the communist revolution did. We have to get good marxists, leninists, party people into positions of power then the problems will solve themselves and the Soviet Union will become a workers paradise. And we will kill or imprison anyone who says it isn't a paradise.

[zartagen]

Whoever these people are, that you think should be Given a seat at " the table", won't do a damn thing. Why? Because they didn't earn it. It's the same as you feel about the privileged, mostly white people You feel their privilege was given, not earned. Two wrongs don't make a right.

What in the fuck does this mean? It makes absolutely no sense. I'd say the vast majority of people currently with a "seat at the table" didn't earn it. And what the hell does "earning it" have to do with action? I'd say that "earning it" would more likely lead to doing nothing, because they sit there with the self-satisfaction of having "earned it."

And all of the above doesn't matter because it's not the fucking point and you're deflecting with bullshit. The point is, we need people in leadership from the parts of society that are most hit by climate change. Multiple people in this thread mentioned that we need education and empowerment for women to decrease birth rates. How does that happen? VOTE IN WOMEN!

[SkiCougar]

How does a carbon tax protect privilege? Incentivizing innovation? Incentivizing implementation, sure, but I have no idea how you build massive amounts of energy production, distribution, and transportation without massive groups of highly technical people, who are led in a specific direction, and have access to capital. It's never been done, ever.

She is literally talking about completely changing the political structure, culture, the economy, etc. then that will somehow fix climate change. That is literally what the leaders of the communist revolution did. We have to get good marxists, leninists, party people into positions of power then the problems will solve themselves and the Soviet Union will become a workers paradise. And we will kill or imprison anyone who says it isn't a paradise.

taxes on carbon actually hurt those who can least afford it in the usa as gas and electricity are a much higher percentage of their income having less income than the rich.

kq has the best comment, "nuclear"; to have clean energy. unfortunately, the usa is so scared of leaks and storing nuclear waste its nearly impossible to get moving on making it a good replacement.

[wyeaster]

eek!! necessary structural change to solve an unprecedented problem makes me think of communists!!

here lies humanity, slaughtered by first world simpletons living in a make-believe world regulated by greed and fear.

[wyeaster]

China is, by far, the biggest contributor to global warming right now. Near Zero regulations on pollution, and willfully breaking agreements to ban CFCs.
FUCK CHINA
https://www.chemistryworld.com/opini...009280.article

maybe you and your buddies should quit buying cheap shit made in china and stop sending your garbage.

[WMD]

taxes on carbon actually hurt those who can least afford it in the usa as gas and electricity are a much higher percentage of their income having less income than the rich.

This doesn't have to be the case depending on how the plan is implemented

The best versions I've seen are revenue neutral, meaning the money raised doesn't go to the treasury but instead it is paid out as a rebate to citizens on an equal basis (equal rebate to each adult for example). Under a plan like this plan somewhere around 60% of the population would make more money than the tax would cost them.

The poor would actually profit as they use less energy, and thus would pay less tax, while the rich would pay a higher tax as they are the ones with multiple large homes who fly everywhere, etc. this also incentivized the wealthy to support green technology quickly.

[4matic]

Good stuff WMD.

The purge is coming so spook can get his rightful place as a distinguished, well respected, high ranking official in the new order.

[muted]

China is, by far, the biggest contributor to global warming right now. Near Zero regulations on pollution, and willfully breaking agreements to ban CFCs.
FUCK CHINA
https://www.chemistryworld.com/opini...009280.article

Your article says they are trying hard actually, although they have a ways to go on enforcement.

"China’s government is already trying to clamp down on CFC-11 production. In 2015, officials in Shandong province shut down 15 manufacturers of prohibited ozone-destroying chemicals, according to a New York Times investigation in June. And earlier this year, the Chinese government tightened up regulations on the use of carbon tetrachloride, a precursor to CFC-11."

And near zero regulations on pollutions? What?

https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2...ina-pollution/

"Leaders at the congress said they will raise spending to curb pollution by 19 percent over the previous year to 40.5 billion yuan ($6.4 billion) and aim to cut sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide emissions by 3 percent. They said heavy air pollution days in key cities are down 50 percent in five years."

[muted]

maybe you and your buddies should quit buying cheap shit made in china and stop sending your garbage.

China stopped the entire worlds low-grade, polluting garbage earlier this year.

[muted]

This bill was just introduced by Senator assman from WY: "S.3559 - A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to terminate the credit for new qualified plug-in electric drive motor vehicles and to provide for a Federal Highway user fee on alternative fuel vehicles."

[k2skier112]

The levelized cost of nuclear power is relatively high compared to other energy sources: the minimum cost per megawatt hour to build a new nuclear plant is $97, compared to $49 for utility-scale solar, $48 for combined cycle gas, and $32 for wind. Nuclear power is only able to remain viable in power markets due to subsidies. Capital costs to build nuclear plants can run into the tens of billions of dollars, and are much more expensive compared to wind, solar and gas plants. Continued government support for building new plants and operating existing ones is a key factor in maintaining the U.S. nuclear industry.

https://climatenexus.org/climate-new...as-renewables/

[The Tortoise]

taxes on carbon actually hurt those who can least afford it in the usa as gas and electricity are a much higher percentage of their income having less income than the rich.

https://ipolitics.ca/2018/09/26/low-...bon-tax-study/


The only advantage of nuclear (and it's a significant one) is that it can provide a consistent base supply of electricity that renewable sources cannot. Or at least until the storage technology is sufficiently developed and implemented.

[Sirshredalot]

This doesn't have to be the case depending on how the plan is implemented

The best versions I've seen are revenue neutral, meaning the money raised doesn't go to the treasury but instead it is paid out as a rebate to citizens on an equal basis (equal rebate to each adult for example). Under a plan like this plan somewhere around 60% of the population would make more money than the tax would cost them.

The poor would actually profit as they use less energy, and thus would pay less tax, while the rich would pay a higher tax as they are the ones with multiple large homes who fly everywhere, etc. this also incentivized the wealthy to support green technology quickly.

The incidence of a scheme like that would probably be modestly progressive, on net, for exactly the reasons you lay out.

I would back a scheme like that 100 percent.

Though we are probably far enough along at this point that we need to dump a shit-ton of money into carbon recapture, I'm fine with that research dough coming from general revenues.

[skaredshtles]

This bill was just introduced by Senator assman from WY: "S.3559 - A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to terminate the credit for new qualified plug-in electric drive motor vehicles and to provide for a Federal Highway user fee on alternative fuel vehicles."

[toast2266]

Capitalism and democracy are poorly suited for the massive changes that are needed. The world needs a benevolent dictator.

[PNWbrit]

Huge reduction in meat-eating ‘essential’ to avoid climate breakdown

Major study also finds huge changes to farming are needed to avoid destroying Earth’s ability to feed its population

The new research, published in the journal Nature, is the most thorough to date and combined data from every country to assess the impact of food production on the global environment. It then looked at what could be done to stop the looming food crisis.

[skaredshtles]

Capitalism and democracy are poorly suited for the massive changes that are needed. The world needs a benevolent dictator.

First thing that gets the axe is recreation.

[toast2266]

First thing that gets the axe is recreation.

That doesn't sound very benevolent. I, like the rest of the world, want to have my cake and eat it too. Which is why we're fucked.

[muted]

I'm no fan of communism, but it does let China make some drastic changes in attempts to curb pollution.

[WMD]

Nothing is over until we decide it is! Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? Hell no!

We've all got to quit saying we're fucked and take action while we still have a chance!

Midterms are coming. Vote!

Read the IPCC's Summary for Policymakers (https://350.org/wp-content/uploads/2..._spm_final.pdf).

Print it out. Give it to your representative and ask them what they are going to do about this.

[wyeaster]

China stopped the entire worlds low-grade, polluting garbage earlier this year.

yes, good move

[PB]

So: meat eating = bad, and kids = bad.

Obvious solution: eat kids

[wyeaster]

Good stuff WMD.

The purge is coming so spook can get his rightful place as a distinguished, well respected, high ranking official in the new order.

yawn. i wonder if you are a global net-positive or a global net negative if one includes the impacts of your work.

it's also funny you keep going on about high-ranking officals. a country's minister of the economy and also the state representative to opec is actually a high-ranking official.

petty old racists are about as sad as it gets.

[AK47bp]

So: meat eating = bad, and kids = bad.

Obvious solution: eat kids

You're onto something here. Babies are delicious and produce 50-100 watts of power.



Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[skaredshtles]

That doesn't sound very benevolent. I, like the rest of the world, want to have my cake and eat it too. Which is why we're fucked.

Pretty much.