Irreconcilable differences
- Thread starter mongo18
- Start date
Rey C.
Racing is life... anything else is just waiting.
No, your muddled point wasn't missed, lad.
Just keep screaming, "who's with me?!". Who knows, maybe there's a sheep or two who will follow you out the door. :dunno:
What an interesting level of sarcasm xfire
Maybe you should check the level of idiocy of those who praised Obamacare and sanctuary cities. Only people who were unwilling to work and who hated law and order approved those. :thefinger:Really Zee
I don't listen to more than highly biased CNN,MSNBC, CBS, ABC and NBC and all the asssociated Obama muppet channels and their mainstream medias shoewaxers .And all those are leftist propaganda channels. Leftism and any form of socialism doesn't fit and doesn't have its place in America. Don't worry for me.
Last edited:
Rey C.
Racing is life... anything else is just waiting.
Er, when did I say that I don't take sides? Looks like you've missed some "episodes" here over the years. And you've apparently fallen into the fallacy that there are only two sides. That's not how life works. You may be one of those binary people. I really don't know. But I'm not. I just don't run with groups out of some herdlike need. There may be times/issues when my side matches up (at least somewhat) with your beliefs. And there may be other times/issues when my side matches up (at least somewhat) with those that you oppose. Just depends on what the issue is. And when did I say that I have no opinions about what's happening in my country? I don't remember typing that. It's interesting how you jump to wild (and inaccurate) assumptions, while proclaiming that you're with "the good guys". A little Ben Linus going on there, eh?
BTW, it's rather odd that my country concerns you so much... but that is perfectly cool by me. Banter aside, I have a legit question for you. These "irreconcilable differences" that are causing you to have thoughts of a civil war, precisely what are they? What are these issues, exactly? I'm genuinely curious to know what it is that weighs so heavily on your mind. It's not a baited trap. Tell me.
I'm with him. Conservatism is a fucking scam. A con. Has been for a long long time
The Long Con
https://thebaffler.com/salvos/the-long-con
Er, when did I say that I don't take sides? Looks like you've missed some "episodes" here over the years. And you've apparently fallen into the fallacy that there are only two sides. That's not how life works. You may be one of those binary people. I really don't know. But I'm not. I just don't run with groups out of some herdlike need. There may be times/issues when my side matches up (at least somewhat) with your beliefs. And there may be other times/issues when my side matches up (at least somewhat) with those that you oppose. Just depends on what the issue is. And when did I say that I have no opinions about what's happening in my country? I don't remember typing that. It's interesting how you jump to wild (and inaccurate) assumptions, while proclaiming that you're with "the good guys". A little Ben Linus going on there, eh?
Banter aside, I have a legit question for you. These "irreconcilable differences" that are causing you to have thoughts of a civil war, precisely what are they? What are these issues, exactly? I'm genuinely curious to know what it is that weighs so heavily on your mind. It's not a baited trap. Tell me.
This has gotten tiresome. First, you made an idiot of yourself in your haste to rush in here and drop the bombshell that I'm just the same as some trump loving piece of shit, then you tried the condescending, dismissive approach, and now you're arguing semantics. It's like BC all over again, but without the balls.
When did I say there were only 2 sides? And what side do you think I'm on? What group am I running with out of a herdlike need? Please enlighten me, oh wise one!
I lived in your country for 10 years. My wife was born and raised in your country. My children are citizens of your country as well as my own. I have ample excuse for my interest in your country. When I arrived there 15 years ago I considered myself right of centre and assumed I'd be a republican, but after getting to know them I concluded that they're a very dangerous and fanatical group of people that threaten the freedom and democracy that your country loves to boast about, and the years since have only proved me right.
What are my issues??? If you can't look around and guess, then you're part of the problem. I'm not going to engage you any further.
Isn't that quaint. Remember the days when Mitt Romney was the best example of a republican liar?
Rey C.
Racing is life... anything else is just waiting.
No, I'm not guessing anything. Speak your mind or don't. So in other words, ya got nothing. That's too bad. But I sensed that's where you were headed. Ask for some actual reasoning or some specifics, and you go full playground juvenile and then conveniently develop a case of selective mutism. Oh well... :dunno:
I have to say though, with Straight Shooter (for example), I've found that in most disagreements that I've had with him, he can make his points and justify his reasoning. We still may not agree at the end of it, but he doesn't (in my dealings with him) just throw an angry tantrum and tap out. For some reason, I thought that you might have some game too. Guess not.
Ah yes, the victory claim, how very BC of you. I didn't tap out, I was trying to not hijack this thread, because I genuinely wanted some quality discussion on this topic. But you didn't come here for that, you came to show off your arrogance and superiority, because that's all you've done so far. So fine, let's deal with you instead.
I thought I laid it out pretty clearly in the OP and subsequent posts, at least, everyone else seemed to understand. I even provided several examples. I'm sorry you need it drawn in crayon for you.
As stated, my problem is with those who reject reality in favour of their own, a problem that quite likely hasn't become any more widespread recently, but does seem to have become more organised, and of which the republican party is emblematic. When these people form groups large enough and sufficiently powerful that their warped beliefs affect the rest of us, something needs to be done.
On climate change, the scientific community has overwhelmingly and repeatedly told us that the science is settled, but right wing governments around the world refuse to accept the consensus. Of course, your minority government goes a step further and has been removing environmental protections as fast as it can for the last 3 years.
On anti vaxxers, this drain on our species has decided that they know better than doctors, and now so many people in developed nations are unvaccinated that herd immunity has lost, so those who can't be immunized for legitimate reasons no longer have the protection of mass immunization, and we're seeing a resurgence in diseases previously practically eradicated.
These are recalcitrant beliefs by a loud minority that are having real impacts on the lives of the majority. A majority who live under the tacit agreement that the reason we have doctors, scientists, and engineers is because there are areas of knowledge too complicated for people who are otherwise occupied to understand, so we trust the word of these experts. We even have a peer review system, as a check on their legitimacy. This is what our society, and all of our progress thus far, has been built on.
Why so hard on republicans? Because they are hands down the worst group of revisionists in the world today in my opinion. Yes, there are more ignorant and dishonest groups out there (barely), but none with the resources and opportunities available to the republican party and their base. Do you really need examples of their ignorance, hypocrisy, or self contradiction? Again, you might say "yes, but democrats do that too, all politicians do!" And you'd be fractionally correct. But the democrats could never even hope to do it on the same scale, and with the same disregard for the light of day, that republicans have. The democrat base would never accept and even excuse a leader who openly lies to them the way the republican base does. But we're not here to talk about democrats, and I've never been a huge fan anyway, though I do still believe that Obama could have been a pretty good president if republicans hadn't sat on their hands and refused to do anything at all for most of his presidency. Dems got a lot of shit done in those first 18 months or so.
These groups are trying to drag us into a new dark age, one with serious, life or death consequences that we as a species could be dealing with for a very long time. It cannot be allowed to happen, but it is happening, and what I wanted to talk about, before you came in here to tell me I'm ridiculous, is how do we stop this regression, without a war, and without oppressing large groups of the population, when there are people who absolutely refuse to accept any sort of reality that conflicts with their own, no matter how stark and clear?
If they can't be coerced, and we don't want to force them, what other options are there? That's what I wanted to talk about.
I thought I laid it out pretty clearly in the OP and subsequent posts, at least, everyone else seemed to understand. I even provided several examples. I'm sorry you need it drawn in crayon for you.
As stated, my problem is with those who reject reality in favour of their own, a problem that quite likely hasn't become any more widespread recently, but does seem to have become more organised, and of which the republican party is emblematic. When these people form groups large enough and sufficiently powerful that their warped beliefs affect the rest of us, something needs to be done.
On climate change, the scientific community has overwhelmingly and repeatedly told us that the science is settled, but right wing governments around the world refuse to accept the consensus. Of course, your minority government goes a step further and has been removing environmental protections as fast as it can for the last 3 years.
On anti vaxxers, this drain on our species has decided that they know better than doctors, and now so many people in developed nations are unvaccinated that herd immunity has lost, so those who can't be immunized for legitimate reasons no longer have the protection of mass immunization, and we're seeing a resurgence in diseases previously practically eradicated.
These are recalcitrant beliefs by a loud minority that are having real impacts on the lives of the majority. A majority who live under the tacit agreement that the reason we have doctors, scientists, and engineers is because there are areas of knowledge too complicated for people who are otherwise occupied to understand, so we trust the word of these experts. We even have a peer review system, as a check on their legitimacy. This is what our society, and all of our progress thus far, has been built on.
Why so hard on republicans? Because they are hands down the worst group of revisionists in the world today in my opinion. Yes, there are more ignorant and dishonest groups out there (barely), but none with the resources and opportunities available to the republican party and their base. Do you really need examples of their ignorance, hypocrisy, or self contradiction? Again, you might say "yes, but democrats do that too, all politicians do!" And you'd be fractionally correct. But the democrats could never even hope to do it on the same scale, and with the same disregard for the light of day, that republicans have. The democrat base would never accept and even excuse a leader who openly lies to them the way the republican base does. But we're not here to talk about democrats, and I've never been a huge fan anyway, though I do still believe that Obama could have been a pretty good president if republicans hadn't sat on their hands and refused to do anything at all for most of his presidency. Dems got a lot of shit done in those first 18 months or so.
These groups are trying to drag us into a new dark age, one with serious, life or death consequences that we as a species could be dealing with for a very long time. It cannot be allowed to happen, but it is happening, and what I wanted to talk about, before you came in here to tell me I'm ridiculous, is how do we stop this regression, without a war, and without oppressing large groups of the population, when there are people who absolutely refuse to accept any sort of reality that conflicts with their own, no matter how stark and clear?
If they can't be coerced, and we don't want to force them, what other options are there? That's what I wanted to talk about.
Rey C.
Racing is life... anything else is just waiting.
OK, now we have some specific examples, and then a general dislike of the Republican party and what you perceive that it stands for - I'll stick with the specifics and data. On the issue of climate change and pollution, and which nations are the major contributors, here's what I found. According to the International Energy Agency, these are the top 20 highest emitters of cumulative carbon dioxide in 2016:
1 China 9056.8MT
2 United States 4833.1MT
3 India 2076.8MT
4 Russian Federation 1438.6MT
5 Japan 1147.1MT
6 Germany 731.6MT
7 South Korea 589.2MT
8 Islamic Republic of Iran 563.4MT
9 Canada 540.8MT
10 Saudi Arabia 527.2MT
11 Indonesia 454.9MT
12 Mexico 445.5MT
13 Brazil 416.7MT
14 South Africa 414.4MT
15 Australia 392.4MT
16 United Kingdom 371.1MT
17 Turkey 338.8MT
18 Italy 325.7MT
19 Poland 293.1MT
20 France 292.9MT
Not exactly a collection of right wing governments, I'd say.
What about plastic pollution? According to a report from the Ocean Conservancy and the McKinsey Center for Business and Environment, between 10 and 30 billion pounds of plastic is floating around in the world’s oceans, and more than half of it comes from just five countries: China, Indonesia, the Philippines, Thailand, and Vietnam. Again, not exactly far right, or even right leaning governments.
Now, all of that is NOT to shoot down your dislike and/or anger at what's being done, or not done, by Republican politicians in the U.S. as far as climate change is concerned. But it is to point out that while "right wing governments around the world refuse to accept the consensus" may be true, they are not the greatest contributors to the issue. Most of what I see on both lists are centrist, or actually left wing/socialist/communist governments.
As for the anti-vaxxers, I wasn't aware that those people are necessarily Republican or even right wing. In fact, some in the left wing Hollywood crowd jumped on board that "movement" years ago, as they bought into various conspiracy theories. But I don't know much about those folks. While you can say that they are an example of backwardness, I'm really not aware that most Americans pay much attention to them.
Look, these are apparently specific issues that legitimately bother you, and no one said that you were wrong in being bothered by them. But what I did say (in my initial post) was that Americans are more concerned and focused on issues relating to their immediate needs. Here's a dynamic chart which you may find interesting. But to sum it up:
So, it's the economy that matters more... and that's how it's been throughout my lifetime. That issue is what gets people to pull this or that lever more than any other issue, most of the time. Other polls may show other topics further down the line (the environment fell into "something else" here), but the top ones will remain roughly the same.
OK, I was admittedly a bit pointed in how I expressed my initial objections, and that led to some unpleasantness. So I'll apologize. I'm not here to "play the dozens" these days. But in short, while you may feel that you, or someone, needs to do something about these situations that bother you (without war, oppression or coercion), I just see no evidence that there are enough people who feel the way that you do, at least not with the same level of "passion", to worry about any sort of violent conflict. That's not me being mean to you, but it is what it is... or isn't. County by county, we're dealing with a Second Amendment Sanctuary movement in my state right now. Some Democrat lawmaker has made comments about the governor having the power to call in the National Guard. :eek: Now that could turn into a nasty dustup if people don't calm their tempers before something silly happens. Both sides need to cool their tits.
P.S. I voted for Obama twice. The first time was an anti Palin vote, plus I thought that he was a centrist who could lead us out of that horrible economic downturn (BC and I had a long running dogfight about that, BTW). The second time was an anti Romney vote because in a "previous life", I've known (and hated) private equity vultures. I still believe that had Mitch McConnell and the Repubs worked with him early on in the first term, the nation would have been MUCH better off MUCH faster, and he *may* not have made that pandering dive to the left in his second term. Or, maybe that's who he really was. With politicians, you can never be sure.
Anyway... :hatsoff:
1 China 9056.8MT
2 United States 4833.1MT
3 India 2076.8MT
4 Russian Federation 1438.6MT
5 Japan 1147.1MT
6 Germany 731.6MT
7 South Korea 589.2MT
8 Islamic Republic of Iran 563.4MT
9 Canada 540.8MT
10 Saudi Arabia 527.2MT
11 Indonesia 454.9MT
12 Mexico 445.5MT
13 Brazil 416.7MT
14 South Africa 414.4MT
15 Australia 392.4MT
16 United Kingdom 371.1MT
17 Turkey 338.8MT
18 Italy 325.7MT
19 Poland 293.1MT
20 France 292.9MT
Not exactly a collection of right wing governments, I'd say.
What about plastic pollution? According to a report from the Ocean Conservancy and the McKinsey Center for Business and Environment, between 10 and 30 billion pounds of plastic is floating around in the world’s oceans, and more than half of it comes from just five countries: China, Indonesia, the Philippines, Thailand, and Vietnam. Again, not exactly far right, or even right leaning governments.
Now, all of that is NOT to shoot down your dislike and/or anger at what's being done, or not done, by Republican politicians in the U.S. as far as climate change is concerned. But it is to point out that while "right wing governments around the world refuse to accept the consensus" may be true, they are not the greatest contributors to the issue. Most of what I see on both lists are centrist, or actually left wing/socialist/communist governments.
As for the anti-vaxxers, I wasn't aware that those people are necessarily Republican or even right wing. In fact, some in the left wing Hollywood crowd jumped on board that "movement" years ago, as they bought into various conspiracy theories. But I don't know much about those folks. While you can say that they are an example of backwardness, I'm really not aware that most Americans pay much attention to them.
Look, these are apparently specific issues that legitimately bother you, and no one said that you were wrong in being bothered by them. But what I did say (in my initial post) was that Americans are more concerned and focused on issues relating to their immediate needs. Here's a dynamic chart which you may find interesting. But to sum it up:
- Thirty percent of Americans say the economy is the most important issue when determining how they’ll vote for president in 2020. Other key considerations include immigration (19 percent), health care (18 percent) and national security (18 percent).
- A slim majority of respondents believe Biden (46 percent) would do a better job handling the economy than Trump (44 percent). It was essentially a toss-up for the two politicians when factoring in the survey’s 3 percent margin of error. Biden was more favored to handle other key issues, especially health care and immigration.
- Respondents 55 and older were more likely to say health care was the most important issue when choosing a president in 2020. And they tended to think Biden would do a better job of handling the issue compared with President Trump.
- Women said Biden would better handle key political issues, including the economy (54 percent), health care (63 percent), national security (58 percent), immigration (57 percent) and issues that affect your personal financial situation (56 percent). Men generally favored Trump to handle those issues.
So, it's the economy that matters more... and that's how it's been throughout my lifetime. That issue is what gets people to pull this or that lever more than any other issue, most of the time. Other polls may show other topics further down the line (the environment fell into "something else" here), but the top ones will remain roughly the same.
OK, I was admittedly a bit pointed in how I expressed my initial objections, and that led to some unpleasantness. So I'll apologize. I'm not here to "play the dozens" these days. But in short, while you may feel that you, or someone, needs to do something about these situations that bother you (without war, oppression or coercion), I just see no evidence that there are enough people who feel the way that you do, at least not with the same level of "passion", to worry about any sort of violent conflict. That's not me being mean to you, but it is what it is... or isn't. County by county, we're dealing with a Second Amendment Sanctuary movement in my state right now. Some Democrat lawmaker has made comments about the governor having the power to call in the National Guard. :eek: Now that could turn into a nasty dustup if people don't calm their tempers before something silly happens. Both sides need to cool their tits.
P.S. I voted for Obama twice. The first time was an anti Palin vote, plus I thought that he was a centrist who could lead us out of that horrible economic downturn (BC and I had a long running dogfight about that, BTW). The second time was an anti Romney vote because in a "previous life", I've known (and hated) private equity vultures. I still believe that had Mitch McConnell and the Repubs worked with him early on in the first term, the nation would have been MUCH better off MUCH faster, and he *may* not have made that pandering dive to the left in his second term. Or, maybe that's who he really was. With politicians, you can never be sure.
Anyway... :hatsoff:
Oh FFS. Now you're being reasonable at me? If you're going to be like that, then I guess I can admit that I may have bristled up a little more than was necessary. I apologize for comparing you to BC. Nobody deserves that.
I get what you're saying that a comfortable populace is a pacified populace, and it's a good point that I do agree with, but I'm thinking beyond that.
I think you're still misunderstanding my statement a little. I'm not putting climate change deniers and anti-vaxxers on the political right. Though there may be some overlap, I think they are 3 distinct symptoms of the same problem. The "fuck your facts, I've got my own" mentality. Here's a more pointed example:
We're having massive bushfires in Australia at the moment. Before the official bushfire season even started, we'd burned a greater area than last year's fire season total. This is the second driest continent on Earth after Antarctica, and it's the driest it's ever been. All the climate scientists are telling us "this right here, this is climate change." So our prime minister Scott Morrison is doing a press conference about the bushfires, and one of the reporters asks him something climate change related, and he says "I don't believe that climate change has anything to do with these fires." THIS is the problem. You don't get to just not believe it, Scott. You're not a climate scientist, you're a politician. The only thing you know about climate science is what climate scientists fucking tell you! As a private citizen, you can believe whatever the fuck you want, but as leader of a country, you don't get to disregard the information provided by ACTUAL experts. This is the level of arrogance and ignorance that I'm talking about.
It's the people who say "fuck your reality, we're having our own, and if yours has to suffer because of ours then eat shit, because we don't care."
And just to muddy the waters a little, I don't think polluting countries are necessarily climate change denying countries. As you said, and I agree, first priority is food on plates and roofs over heads, and many developing economies may or may not be working towards improving, but still bound by necessity. That doesn't necessarily equate to denying the science.
The world is starting to get pretty small. I'm sure it won't be in our lifetimes, but I think borders are going to start to erode and eventually disappear. I think that, as a global society, a big chunk of us are beginning to realize that we're all in this together, and one day we're not going to have poor countries and rich countries, we're going to have a poor planet or a rich planet. Just one, with all of us in it. And there are likely to be global threats. The scientific community is already tossing around terms like "mass extinction," "mass starvation," and "climate refugees." So there will likely come a time when we can no longer afford to allow people to make up their own facts. Eventually, decisions may have to be made for the greater good. I would hope that the leaders of the time will act on the advice of the experts.
Republicans have a special place in my heart mostly because of the sheer fucking audacity of them. McConnell dragged his feet and refused to confirm hundreds of Obama's judicial nominees, and fast tracked all of trump's, and trump has the balls to brag about how many more judges he's confirmed. For 8 solid years they screamed about deficits, then as soon as they were able, passed their deficit exploding tax bill and now it's what deficit? They purge voter rolls (over 200k in WI and 300k in GA recently), pass voter suppression laws (look at how many states had voter suppression laws in the works within 24 hours after the supreme court repealed parts of the VRA in 2013), gerrymander (yes, a couple of dems too, but it pales in comparison), and then they yell and scream about democrats rigging elections. They sat for 8 years and obstructed Obama's agenda, and are now obstructing hundreds of house bills in the senate, but have the balls to talk about "obstructionist, do-nothing" democrats. When someone looks me in the eye and lies to me, and I know they're lying, and they know they're lying, and the evidence is right there, plain as day, but they keep doing it anyway, I get irate.
Yes, it makes me angry. Angrier than I should let it make me. I'd love to stand on the nearest soap box and yell "who's with me?" But that would be exposing the hypocrisy you came in here looking for.
It's just the sheer arrogance. Take meester perfect, he's a prime example. He's got his head so far into his fake mass shooting conspiracy theory bullshit that it supersedes human decency. He'll mock and berate actual shooting victims and their families, just like you hear about on the news, because his fabricated reality takes precedence over actual reality.
Ok fine, I got ranty. You dragged it out of me.
Whatever. I had this thing planned out in my head at work today, but it's Friday, so I came home and smoked a hundred weed, and it started off how I planned but then got away from me. I've already spent way more Friday afternoon than I like to talking about politics on the internet. I have far better things to do with a Friday.
Have a good one, y'all.
I get what you're saying that a comfortable populace is a pacified populace, and it's a good point that I do agree with, but I'm thinking beyond that.
I think you're still misunderstanding my statement a little. I'm not putting climate change deniers and anti-vaxxers on the political right. Though there may be some overlap, I think they are 3 distinct symptoms of the same problem. The "fuck your facts, I've got my own" mentality. Here's a more pointed example:
We're having massive bushfires in Australia at the moment. Before the official bushfire season even started, we'd burned a greater area than last year's fire season total. This is the second driest continent on Earth after Antarctica, and it's the driest it's ever been. All the climate scientists are telling us "this right here, this is climate change." So our prime minister Scott Morrison is doing a press conference about the bushfires, and one of the reporters asks him something climate change related, and he says "I don't believe that climate change has anything to do with these fires." THIS is the problem. You don't get to just not believe it, Scott. You're not a climate scientist, you're a politician. The only thing you know about climate science is what climate scientists fucking tell you! As a private citizen, you can believe whatever the fuck you want, but as leader of a country, you don't get to disregard the information provided by ACTUAL experts. This is the level of arrogance and ignorance that I'm talking about.
It's the people who say "fuck your reality, we're having our own, and if yours has to suffer because of ours then eat shit, because we don't care."
And just to muddy the waters a little, I don't think polluting countries are necessarily climate change denying countries. As you said, and I agree, first priority is food on plates and roofs over heads, and many developing economies may or may not be working towards improving, but still bound by necessity. That doesn't necessarily equate to denying the science.
The world is starting to get pretty small. I'm sure it won't be in our lifetimes, but I think borders are going to start to erode and eventually disappear. I think that, as a global society, a big chunk of us are beginning to realize that we're all in this together, and one day we're not going to have poor countries and rich countries, we're going to have a poor planet or a rich planet. Just one, with all of us in it. And there are likely to be global threats. The scientific community is already tossing around terms like "mass extinction," "mass starvation," and "climate refugees." So there will likely come a time when we can no longer afford to allow people to make up their own facts. Eventually, decisions may have to be made for the greater good. I would hope that the leaders of the time will act on the advice of the experts.
Republicans have a special place in my heart mostly because of the sheer fucking audacity of them. McConnell dragged his feet and refused to confirm hundreds of Obama's judicial nominees, and fast tracked all of trump's, and trump has the balls to brag about how many more judges he's confirmed. For 8 solid years they screamed about deficits, then as soon as they were able, passed their deficit exploding tax bill and now it's what deficit? They purge voter rolls (over 200k in WI and 300k in GA recently), pass voter suppression laws (look at how many states had voter suppression laws in the works within 24 hours after the supreme court repealed parts of the VRA in 2013), gerrymander (yes, a couple of dems too, but it pales in comparison), and then they yell and scream about democrats rigging elections. They sat for 8 years and obstructed Obama's agenda, and are now obstructing hundreds of house bills in the senate, but have the balls to talk about "obstructionist, do-nothing" democrats. When someone looks me in the eye and lies to me, and I know they're lying, and they know they're lying, and the evidence is right there, plain as day, but they keep doing it anyway, I get irate.
Yes, it makes me angry. Angrier than I should let it make me. I'd love to stand on the nearest soap box and yell "who's with me?" But that would be exposing the hypocrisy you came in here looking for.
It's just the sheer arrogance. Take meester perfect, he's a prime example. He's got his head so far into his fake mass shooting conspiracy theory bullshit that it supersedes human decency. He'll mock and berate actual shooting victims and their families, just like you hear about on the news, because his fabricated reality takes precedence over actual reality.
Ok fine, I got ranty. You dragged it out of me.
Whatever. I had this thing planned out in my head at work today, but it's Friday, so I came home and smoked a hundred weed, and it started off how I planned but then got away from me. I've already spent way more Friday afternoon than I like to talking about politics on the internet. I have far better things to do with a Friday.
Have a good one, y'all.
Wrong. All those I put in bold are currently governend by Center-Right or Far-Right governments. Those in italics are ruled by dictators not affiliated to any political parties. So in the end that's 11 Right/Center-Right countries, 7 Left/Center-Left countries and 2 not affiliated.
Rey C.
Racing is life... anything else is just waiting.
Rey C.
Racing is life... anything else is just waiting.
Before "other issues" began to creep into his life, I could sometimes have a discussion with him. He joined here about the same time that I did and we were actually close to the same age. Because I began talking about retiring (way early), he somehow had it in his head that I was much older than him. From his old profile, I was amused to find out that he was actually older than me (assuming his age was accurate). But anyway, when I had more time, I enjoyed conversing with him and a lot of other people here, whether I agreed with them or not. The ones I didn't agree with on particular issues were often more interesting to me than the ones I did agree with. But there's no way to have any sort of meaningful discussion if you start off on the wrong foot.
I can't speak to that particular situation, but yeah, I understand your point better. I think part of the reason that people sometimes dismiss some findings or statistics is because conclusions are sometimes influenced or skewed based on who commissions the study. I'm not saying that's the basis for all that frustrates the world right now. I don't know. But in the work that I've done for corporations over the years, where unions and management would present conflicting stats, each would base conclusions on their own (cherry picked) data. All that to say, yes, people do (rightly or wrongly) dismiss certain things that others believe are clear evidence of a cause & effect. People are suspicious these days. They don't trust the media. They don't trust government. And they don't trust some scientific findings. So much of what goes in our ears is just a marketing campaign. So people just shut down and pick whatever fits with their view of things.
No, it's not necessarily that they're denying anything. In many cases, they just don't really care. In the case of China, maintaining economic growth trumps (no pun intended) environmental concerns much/most of the time. The same could be said of India and many other developing nations. They're beginning to pay the price for that, but yes, so are the rest of us. The sad state of our oceans is something that caught my attention several years ago.
That may happen. Who knows? But the fact that large multi-national corporations will be the greatest beneficiaries tells me that if it happens, the ending won't necessarily be a happy one for those who value personal rights and freedoms. I can see a sort of corporatocracy (and I'm not talking about conspiracy theories involving the Rothschilds). One thing that I learned in a Sociology of Economics class a loooong time ago has stuck with me: those in power will only give up the slightest amount of power that allows them to maintain the majority of their power. I've never really been a follower of groups or movements - Perot's United We Stand was a notable exception. But that class, and other things that I began to notice about the nature of humankind, cemented my belief that anyone who knocks on your door and says, "I'm from the government and I'm here to help you!"... should be avoided like the plague.
As a Brit friend of mine says, at times I think that Meester is just "taking a piss." Maybe he's not. I'm never sure. But I'm pretty sure that he's not really a Republican any more than Lyndon LaRouche was really a Democrat.
Earlier on and later, you mentioned what can be done about, or with, people who refuse to basically "wake up and smell the coffee?", as you see it. I think our interaction has proved that barking back & forth doesn't work. People, by nature, get their backs up and then neither gets anything accomplished. Both sides, left/right-Democrat/Republican have things to answer for. IMO, there's no point in trying to keep score or present one as the good guy and the other as the bad guy. See, to me (and a fellow named George Washington), they're both/all bad guys. Political parties are power hungry and corrupt to some varying degree by their very nature. At least on economic issues (since that's what I follow most), I could write six pages here on how each party or ideology is more full of shit than a cattle yard during a rainstorm. But with enough reasonable people on each side, I think that at least some progress could be made that would benefit this nation, if not the world. Remember, when Ronald Reagan was President, Tip O'Neill was the Speaker of the House. These two Irishmen would fight like mad dogs during the day, then in the evening, sit down over a glass of Scotch and work things out enough that the country wasn't coming apart at the seams. People these days have all but lost the ability to discuss things, unless they are in complete agreement. That really has to change if there's to be any constructive way forward.
Enjoy your weekend too.
Johan said:
According to the International Energy Agency, these are the top 20 highest emitters of cumulative carbon dioxide in 2016.
...
Fair enough. But What would be more interesting would be to know which wether countries under Left-wing government did reduce their emissions and wether those under Right-wing governments increased them...
Anyone that's still a Republican isn't very smart. I could kinda sympathize with the vulture capitalists wanting to stay in the party up until Trump, but that's an unacceptable excuse now.
That's why it's imperative to kick that clown out of the WH. And the only man to do the job is Bernie Sanders. This is it folks. Get on the train. This is the last chance for Bernie
Rey C.
Racing is life... anything else is just waiting.
As long as communist China is topping the list, would it really matter what the small fish do? If you want to effectively address a problem (and not just do little feel good, superficial things), you have to first look at the major contributors to the problem, yes?
This is just one of the issues that Mongo brought up. While I'm not saying that it's not important, I'd say that there are also other issues that are important to people of all stripes around the world... like human rights abuses/unfair imprisonment, the right to a fair trial, freedom of speech and assembly, etc. So if we're talking about global issues, and Mongo is correct that the world is getting smaller, we have to realize that the methods to correct problems won't be the same in China (for instance) as in the U.S. or Europe. You can protest here. You can protest there. But let Greta take a trip to China and make any sort of perceived insult to the communist government about the horrid environmental conditions there. The next question posed would be, "where's Greta?" And the answer would be, "Greta who?! We haven't seen her." True totalitarian governments play by their own set of rules. The only thing they react to is pain. And though I didn't vote for him (or Hillary), here's a case where I totally agree with Trump's approach on dealing with them on the unfair trade issues. If you want to deal with them on environmental concerns, you'd have to develop a plan that would have the same economic impact on them as what Trump has pushed through.
Just sticking with climate change and environmental concerns for a second... whatever solutions that various activists propose, they also need to have a plan for how to address the unintended consequences - like job losses. Simply saying, "let's get rid of X, Y and Z industries", and ignoring the people who make their livings in those industries, is a guaranteed way to create strong opposition to your plan. That's why, to this day, you wouldn't want to wear an Obama t-shirt in areas of West Virginia and Kentucky that were hit hard by his "war on coal". I don't know how much good his mission actually did for the environment (maybe it was wonderful... I don't know). But because there was no plan to deal with the job losses that went with it, other than making it easier for these people to collect on (fake) disability claims and put their families on Medicaid, rightly or wrongly, he is hated with a passion. They see Obama in much the same way that people in my father's generation saw Herbert Hoover.
What's the old saying? The road to Hell is paved with good intentions.
I'm just saying...
First, I wouldn't say China is communist. It may be governed by the Communist Party, the ideology of the government couldn't be more different from the precepts of Mao, particulary on the economy and the role of big corporations.
You're right and that's why there has to what we call in Europe a "ecological-transition". The jobs that would be lost due to the the slow disapearance of carbon-dioxyde emitting indistries have to be replaced by new jobs. And that's possible 'cause reduciong carbon emissions means relying more on sustainable industries, particulary sustainable energy. And some of these new jobs, as much as possible, have to be created in the regions that would be hit hard carbon-dioxyde emitting industries downfall.
Coal is dead. At least in western civlised countries. Trump said he would save coal US coal, he's not : https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/a...keeps-dropping-under-trump-coal-jobs-will-too
On Coal, China is dominating. They sell more coal than the US, Australia, Russia, Indonesia, India, Poland, Colombia and Kazaksthan combined
And oil is controled by the OPEC (Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries), which is dominated by Saudi Arabia, a country that has proven, time after time, that it is not a reliable ally.
So, relying less and less on oil and coal would mean relying less and less on China and Saudi Arabia. Doesn't that seem like a good thing ?
Youmentioned China as the most polluting country in the world. That's true. But China is moving in the right direction, they are investing a lot into the "green economy".
Rey C.
Racing is life... anything else is just waiting.
Well, whether the Chinese government strictly follows the ideology of Mao or not isn't really the point. The point is, the Chinese government does as it pleases. There is little respect for human rights, intellectual property rights or environmental concerns that don't fit within their five year plans. And when they make agreements, they tend not to follow through. It's like a rat caught eating cheese, and then he claims that he hasn't violated the agreement not to eat the cheese... while there's a fat slice of cheddar hanging out of his mouth. But their sorry attitude toward any number of global concerns is backed up by the immense economic power they've had since they were (foolishly) allowed into the WTO. Those of us who opposed that decision were called isolationists and worse. But just like the condemnation of NAFTA by Perot and those of us who backed him, other people believed the lies of their favored D or R politicians - and now, here we are. The high ranking commies pull the strings in China. The well paid lobbyists pull the strings here. Has anybody ever sat and wondered why companies and wealthy individuals often make donations to both (corrupt) political parties here? No? Might want to dig a little deeper on that.
The U.S. coal industry has made a comeback since Trump took office. Your linked Bloomberg article even pointed that out, although it did speculate that the comeback *may* be short lived. The company that I'm working with now wouldn't be in business if the industry had continued on the path that it had been on. No doubt, reliance on coal has, and probably will continue to decrease. As demand falls because of transitions to other fuel types or in the event of a global economic slowdown, it could happen. But until we have a way to provide a smooth economic and employment transition, suddenly shutting off the spigot will cause (no theory or guess needed) great economic harm in certain regions, just as it did a few years ago. The very same thing is true of the agriculture and farming industries, as well as the automobile industry and others.
I want to hear these politicians (who'll still get fat paychecks even if they set the house on fire) come up with some detailed, real world plans about how they're going to implement these nice sounding ideas.
The U.S. coal industry has made a comeback since Trump took office. Your linked Bloomberg article even pointed that out, although it did speculate that the comeback *may* be short lived. The company that I'm working with now wouldn't be in business if the industry had continued on the path that it had been on. No doubt, reliance on coal has, and probably will continue to decrease. As demand falls because of transitions to other fuel types or in the event of a global economic slowdown, it could happen. But until we have a way to provide a smooth economic and employment transition, suddenly shutting off the spigot will cause (no theory or guess needed) great economic harm in certain regions, just as it did a few years ago. The very same thing is true of the agriculture and farming industries, as well as the automobile industry and others.
I want to hear these politicians (who'll still get fat paychecks even if they set the house on fire) come up with some detailed, real world plans about how they're going to implement these nice sounding ideas.
Similar threads
