Climate Change & Why I Am Such A Cynical Bastard

BOOGIE MAN

Logic and Reason
Established Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
7,676
Location
Under the bed
This.

And I don't want to hear a word about climate change until the third world shit holes clean up their act to at least 20th century standards.
It's a wonder that under the Paris Climate treaty the US had to shut down coal power plants but China and India were/are allowed to build more.

And when all of those US coal companies' values dropped drastically, guess who bought them up for pennies on the dollar?

I'm all for "saving the planet" but until china and India catch up to us, we shouldn't have to do SHIT.

Side note, weatherchannel has a special broadcast about THE RACE TO SAVE THE PLANET 2020 that's only for the democratic candidates to participate in. I think the flames on the planet were a nice touch.
image_175432184104_19700118_235515.jpeg


Sent from my SM-N975U using the svtperformance.com mobile app
 

BOOGIE MAN

Logic and Reason
Established Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
7,676
Location
Under the bed
can we be less asshole-ish? Yes.

That's my point. If a grocery store wants to charge you $0.20 a plastic bag as a means to push you to buy a reusbale cloth bag...that's good.
Our plastic bags have a lot less to do with it than the computer chips that get thrown in a pile and set on fire in India and China

Sent from my SM-N975U using the svtperformance.com mobile app
 

Coiled03

Well-Known Member
Established Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2004
Messages
12,265
Location
IL
No. Both side are ****ing idiots, like always. Yes, Democrats, AND Republicans. Both sides are their reason for pushing their beliefs.

I'm not trying to have a friend's company make million off anything. I'm just saying we should all be less of an asshole to mother nature.

I give zero ****s about plastic bags while China and India are dumping toxic waste into the ocean like it's a global toilet for their own use.
 

tones_RS3

I like members members.
Established Member
Premium Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2016
Messages
21,280
Location
MA
Climate change,..............of course!!!
Blame Mother Nature.
 

gimmie11s

I Race Pontiacs
Established Member
Premium Member
Joined
Jun 1, 2004
Messages
18,488
Location
la la land
No. Both side are ****ing idiots, like always. Yes, Democrats, AND Republicans. Both sides are their reason for pushing their beliefs.

I'm not trying to have a friend's company make million off anything. I'm just saying we should all be less of an asshole to mother nature.

FBB6-C63-C-EDBF-4-EF8-BB9-B-FF1-FA74-F3-FBE.gif



Sent from my iPhone using the svtperformance.com mobile app
 

BOOGIE MAN

Logic and Reason
Established Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
7,676
Location
Under the bed
Just because you can't change the actions of a company in China, doesn't mean you can't do your share here.
You're not wrong and your heart is in the right place but you're missing the point. Why should one country's economy (the country that is literally leading the way in battling climate change) suffer for the sake of "saving the planet" via insane rules and regulations when other countries are willing (and allowed to do so by a world wide "super government") to keep adding fuel to the fire?

Sent from my SM-N975U using the svtperformance.com mobile app
 

jpro

Disoriented Poster
Established Member
Joined
May 13, 2008
Messages
5,526
Location
someplace warm
You're not wrong, and your heart is in the right place but you're missing the point. Why should one country's economy (the country that is literally leading the way in battling climate change) suffer for the sake of "saving the planet" via insane rules and regulations when other countries are willing (and allowed to do so by a world wide "super government") to keep adding fuel to the fire?

Sent from my SM-N975U using the svtperformance.com mobile app

Exactly, and that is why pulling out of the Paris Accord is a good thing. It doesn't mean the US can't continue to lead the world in being climate conscious, it just means we're not going to agree to the BS of the Accord.
 

Kevins89notch

Well-Known Member
Established Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2005
Messages
6,651
Location
Central Florida
You're not wrong and your heart is in the right place but you're missing the point. Why should one country's economy (the country that is literally leading the way in battling climate change) suffer for the sake of "saving the planet" via insane rules and regulations when other countries are willing (and allowed to do so by a world wide "super government") to keep adding fuel to the fire?

Sent from my SM-N975U using the svtperformance.com mobile app

That's why I said I'm in the middle. You have the far left wanting to ban cows because they fart, while the right is chanting "drill baby drill" at any cost.

I'm in the middle thinking both sides are equally stupid. The far left is going on emotion and the far right is going on what lobbyists have paid them to say.
 

gimmie11s

I Race Pontiacs
Established Member
Premium Member
Joined
Jun 1, 2004
Messages
18,488
Location
la la land
Ban straws and plastic bags.

**** it, ban plastic. That’ll do it.




Sent from my iPhone using svtperformance.com
 

JAJ

Rapidly Losing Interest
Established Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2012
Messages
790
Location
in the V6L
You're not wrong and your heart is in the right place but you're missing the point. Why should one country's economy (the country that is literally leading the way in battling climate change) suffer for the sake of "saving the planet" via insane rules and regulations when other countries are willing (and allowed to do so by a world wide "super government") to keep adding fuel to the fire?

Sent from my SM-N975U using the svtperformance.com mobile app

So, I'm a contrarian on this, but not the usual kind. I don't see climate change as some kind of left-wing conspiracy. In fact I can't figure out why it's not considered a right-wing movement. That's because, climate change, which is becoming increasingly real to people around the world, is creating one of the biggest business opportunities to come along since the industrial revolution. News reports this week from India and China make it crystal clear that pollution there is a serious problem - worse than LA in the 60's - and they'll have to spend what it takes to fix it. It's going to take an enormous (mostly private sector profit-seeking) investment to move the entire energy economy to a zero-carbon future over the next fifty years or so. It was going to happen eventually anyway - the world's fossil fuel supply isn't infinite in any case, so it's always been just a matter of when.

The question is - who's going to benefit the most - who gets the double win of a clean environment and the world-leading industry that achieved it? Historically, the USA has benefited enormously from taking the lead in other industrial upheavals. If you think about the massive investment made by the US taxpayers in digital communications - military applications mostly - and the way that those investments have created a global leadership position in cell phones and mobile devices, it's hard to argue that the investment was wasted. Yet, here we are with folks arguing that the US should ease up on its climate change agenda and effectively stand aside on new energy and other low-carbon technologies and let other countries take charge and lead the way. It's baffling that Americans seem to want the world leading companies and the jobs that go with them to be built outside the USA.

It makes no sense to me.
 

BOOGIE MAN

Logic and Reason
Established Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
7,676
Location
Under the bed
So, I'm a contrarian on this, but not the usual kind. I don't see climate change as some kind of left-wing conspiracy. In fact I can't figure out why it's not considered a right-wing movement. That's because, climate change, which is becoming increasingly real to people around the world, is creating one of the biggest business opportunities to come along since the industrial revolution. News reports this week from India and China make it crystal clear that pollution there is a serious problem - worse than LA in the 60's - and they'll have to spend what it takes to fix it. It's going to take an enormous (mostly private sector profit-seeking) investment to move the entire energy economy to a zero-carbon future over the next fifty years or so. It was going to happen eventually anyway - the world's fossil fuel supply isn't infinite in any case, so it's always been just a matter of when.

The question is - who's going to benefit the most - who gets the double win of a clean environment and the world-leading industry that achieved it? Historically, the USA has benefited enormously from taking the lead in other industrial upheavals. If you think about the massive investment made by the US taxpayers in digital communications - military applications mostly - and the way that those investments have created a global leadership position in cell phones and mobile devices, it's hard to argue that the investment was wasted. Yet, here we are with folks arguing that the US should ease up on its climate change agenda and effectively stand aside on new energy and other low-carbon technologies and let other countries take charge and lead the way. It's baffling that Americans seem to want the world leading companies and the jobs that go with them to be built outside the USA.

It makes no sense to me.
Sure, and those advancements will come with time. Nuclear energy is a "clean" alternative to coal but many don't like that either. The point is that the US was forced to change their ways (via paris climate treaty), stifling their "super power" status while everyone else was allowed to continue down their own paths.

Sent from my SM-N975U using the svtperformance.com mobile app
 
Last edited:

Kevins89notch

Well-Known Member
Established Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2005
Messages
6,651
Location
Central Florida
The same exact thing can be said for the left. Climate change is a business

Sent from my SM-N975U using the svtperformance.com mobile app

I never said it wasn't. Both sides are filled with idiots on the bottom and businesses at the top. Both sides have shady politicians and corporate lobbyists.

I'm just saying it makes sense for an individual to do what they can do. I was just in Hawaii, and did a rather illegal hike. I took a garbage bag with me and hiking down I picked up a lot of trash. That grocery bag was filled to the brim, and I could have easily gotten more but I was hiking with others, and only brought the one bag.
 

BOOGIE MAN

Logic and Reason
Established Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
7,676
Location
Under the bed
I never said it wasn't. Both sides are filled with idiots on the bottom and businesses at the top. Both sides have shady politicians and corporate lobbyists.

I'm just saying it makes sense for an individual to do what they can do. I was just in Hawaii, and did a rather illegal hike. I took a garbage bag with me and hiking down I picked up a lot of trash. That grocery bag was filled to the brim, and I could have easily gotten more but I was hiking with others, and only brought the one bag.

You never said it wasn't but you didn't say it was, just thought I'd clarify.

I have absolutely zero issue with what you did and I wish more people would think like that. You're thinking smaller scale which I think we all could agree with, it's the large scale things that bother me (ie green new deal)

Sent from my SM-N975U using the svtperformance.com mobile app
 

gimmie11s

I Race Pontiacs
Established Member
Premium Member
Joined
Jun 1, 2004
Messages
18,488
Location
la la land
So, I'm a contrarian on this, but not the usual kind. I don't see climate change as some kind of left-wing conspiracy. In fact I can't figure out why it's not considered a right-wing movement. That's because, climate change, which is becoming increasingly real to people around the world, is creating one of the biggest business opportunities to come along since the industrial revolution. News reports this week from India and China make it crystal clear that pollution there is a serious problem - worse than LA in the 60's - and they'll have to spend what it takes to fix it. It's going to take an enormous (mostly private sector profit-seeking) investment to move the entire energy economy to a zero-carbon future over the next fifty years or so. It was going to happen eventually anyway - the world's fossil fuel supply isn't infinite in any case, so it's always been just a matter of when.

The question is - who's going to benefit the most - who gets the double win of a clean environment and the world-leading industry that achieved it? Historically, the USA has benefited enormously from taking the lead in other industrial upheavals. If you think about the massive investment made by the US taxpayers in digital communications - military applications mostly - and the way that those investments have created a global leadership position in cell phones and mobile devices, it's hard to argue that the investment was wasted. Yet, here we are with folks arguing that the US should ease up on its climate change agenda and effectively stand aside on new energy and other low-carbon technologies and let other countries take charge and lead the way. It's baffling that Americans seem to want the world leading companies and the jobs that go with them to be built outside the USA.

It makes no sense to me.


The fundamental premise of that whole dissertation is wrong.

Climate change is and has been going on since the dawn of the Earth... so what? The idea that human beings causing it is what is argued and is absurd.

If youre talking about wasteful/thoughtless environmental pollution, then yeah--you wont find very many people who support that at all.

No one is saying we should all drive to the nearest beach and dump all of our waste oil into it.
 

AssPikle

Well-Known Member
Established Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2005
Messages
997
Location
Don't know anymore
In all seriousness. There is value in being efficient. Usually efficiency saves money and reduces waste. This is true for manufacturing as well as automotive design. More efficient use of energy saves all the things we all want to save. Money, the planet, titties. That's all I have to say about that.
 

BOOGIE MAN

Logic and Reason
Established Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
7,676
Location
Under the bed
In all seriousness. There is value in being efficient. Usually efficiency saves money and reduces waste. This is true for manufacturing as well as automotive design.

When these changes are allowed to happen organically, yes. But when these changes are forced immediately in the short term, the initial costs can bankrupt companies and industries

Sent from my SM-N975U using the svtperformance.com mobile app
 

AssPikle

Well-Known Member
Established Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2005
Messages
997
Location
Don't know anymore
When these changes are allowed to happen organically, yes. But when these changes are forced immediately in the short term, the initial costs can bankrupt companies and industries

Sent from my SM-N975U using the svtperformance.com mobile app
Totally agree. It has to be smart. Cant just jump to solutions. They have to be done efficiently. I feel too often one side tries to move mountains and the other just dismisses everything. The truth is in making good business decisions while making attempts to improve efficiency. Wont happen overnight, but there are numerous examples of companies improving efficiency, reducing costs, and reducing waste.
 

Users who are viewing this thread



Top