China's 5 year plan

Swimmy

Practice your craft.
WFF Supporter
What is very bad is large corporations operating in other countries to take advantage of the absence of child labor laws and the absence of unions. Corporations that are now Deforesting the Amazon Rain Forrests depleting some of the very air we breathe. Others left due to former POTUS Tarif strategy.

Please try and think about a planet that you and I both love to fish and what it might look like if we don't tighten up regulations!

Pls help me understand your logic. You think if we increasing regulation will keep more companies here in the US?

Or are you saying the US needs to to start regulating other countries?

I'm also not sure about your comment that companies fled the US because of Chinese tariffs. Feel free to share the two or three biggest companies.

Therefore, quit yer bitchin' about regulation. Regulation is what balances the equation. Is the system out of balance? You tell me. I just recently read that real or constant dollar income is up something like 17 or 18% over the last 30 or 40 years for working class people while executive's real income is up more like 170%. Yeah, that's balance all right.

Not when companies have the option to leave the country. And when they do pick up and leave, who benefits the most? More regulation is one of the reasons, imo, you've seen the increase in the income gap.

On top of that we are doing to nothing to help the planet. We are just simply outsourcing all of the polluting to China. I'm all for nimby but pollution is pollution.

So basically under this current global economic model two things are getting fucked: the American worker and the planet.
JSDFwlvf_o.gif


l'm also not advocating for the return of smoke stacks. Just trying to provide a different perspective.
 

girlfisher

Active Member
Pls help me understand your logic. You think if we increasing regulation will keep more companies here in the US?

Or are you saying the US needs to to start regulating other countries?

I'm also not sure about your comment that companies fled the US because of Chinese tariffs. Feel free to share the two or three biggest companies.
Without increasing regulations we will not be able to offset Climate Change!

The World needs to influence other countries. This is the hope of the Paris Accord. The U.S. must step back into a leadership role when it comes to Climate Change instead of being a major carbon emitter. Swimmy, you have scolded people for being Climate Change hypocrites on more than one occasion. Why would you want the U.S. to mimic this hypocrisy?

Former POTUS tariffs, not Chinese tariffs, caused the exodus of Harley Davidson Motorcycles. Here is a short article from the Heritage Foundation which is a Conservative think tank: https://www.heritage.org/trade/commentary/trumps-tariffs-are-pushing-american-companies-leave
 

dustinchromers

Active Member
Without increasing regulations we will not be able to offset Climate Change!

The World needs to influence other countries. This is the hope of the Paris Accord. The U.S. must step back into a leadership role when it comes to Climate Change instead of being a major carbon emitter. Swimmy, you have scolded people for being Climate Change hypocrites on more than one occasion. Why would you want the U.S. to mimic this hypocrisy?

Former POTUS tariffs, not Chinese tariffs, caused the exodus of Harley Davidson Motorcycles. Here is a short article from the Heritage Foundation which is a Conservative think tank: https://www.heritage.org/trade/commentary/trumps-tariffs-are-pushing-american-companies-leave


What regulations do you propose?
 

Swimmy

Practice your craft.
WFF Supporter
Without increasing regulations we will not be able to offset Climate Change!

China has said fuck off. They will be increasing the emissions moving forward, which was the point of this thread.

This is the hope of the Paris Accord.

The Paris Accord ain't worth the paper it is written on.

How many countries are compliant?

Swimmy, you have scolded people for being Climate Change hypocrites on more than one occasion. Why would you want the U.S. to mimic this hypocrisy?

I'm a little confused by the question. We have cut emissions. Why are we being hypocrites?

Former POTUS tariffs, not Chinese tariffs, caused the exodus of Harley Davidson Motorcycles. Here is a short article from the Heritage Foundation which is a Conservative think tank: https://www.heritage.org/trade/commentary/trumps-tariffs-are-pushing-american-companies-leave

Do we still use snopes?


So if the Harley thing is false, do you have any other companies you can share.
 

girlfisher

Active Member
This is what is likely to happen and not what I personally propose: https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/03/the...kly-as-us-focus-shifts-to-climate-change.html

It’s a popular position to take in a world on the brink. But we need sober reality, not reassuring fantasies.

Rather than listening to band aide politics like this, revolutionaries should look for political leadership to individuals and groups with critical analysis of capitalism, the state, patriarchy, and other systems of power, and which have legitimate strategies to defeat these systems.
 

Salmo_g

WFF Supporter
Not when companies have the option to leave the country. And when they do pick up and leave, who benefits the most? More regulation is one of the reasons, imo, you've seen the increase in the income gap.
I was referencing a broader scale concept of regulation, like the difference between zero regulations and the balance necessary to promote a middle class population and a livable environment. Zero regulation gives us a feudal system of the <1%ers, a vast peasantry, with a small merchant class as the middle. It also gives us a smokestack environment of polluted air, land, and water.

Of course corporations will pick up and leave when the regulatory system is all carrots and no stick. This is a long and complex subject, so we'll take it up during a hatch this summer.

One large part of the income gap has to be because the 1%ers are better represented in Congress than is the middle class. Admittedly, this topic is also not a simple one paragraph deal.
 

girlfisher

Active Member
China has said fuck off. They will be increasing the emissions moving forward, which was the point of this thread.



The Paris Accord ain't worth the paper it is written on.

How many countries are compliant?



I'm a little confused by the question. We have cut emissions. Why are we being hypocrites?



Do we still use snopes?


So if the Harley thing is false, do you have any other companies you can share.
China's demise will be their overpopulation issue which they can not escape. But this has nothing to do with the US lowering its carbon footprint!

The Paris Accord is an attempt to at least come to the table to negotiate. We have to start somewhere.

We have not cut emissions nearly enough.

I am quite surprised that you would try and debunk The Heritage Foundation with a site that Conservatives have blasted in the past. Snopes.com is a liberal website that was originally devoted to collecting and debunking urban legends. It was started in 1997 by husband and wife team Barbara and David Mikkelson. Because the Mikkelson's have no formal background or experience in investigative research, it is filled with numerous, intentionally inaccurate information.

There is some evidence that shows that the next generation of young people are taking the Climate Crisis a lot more serious than we are. My only regret is that I will probably not be here to see that better world.
 
Last edited:

dustinchromers

Active Member
China's demise will be their overpopulation issue which they can not escape. But this has nothing to do with the US lowering its carbon footprint!

The Paris Accord is an attempt to at least come to the table to negotiate. We have to start somewhere.

We have not cut emissions nearly enough.

I am quite surprised that you would try and debunk The Heritage Foundation with a site that Conservatives have blasted in the past. Snopes.com is a liberal website that was originally devoted to collecting and debunking urban legends. It was started in 1997 by husband and wife team Barbara and David Mikkelson. Because the Mikkelson's have no formal background or experience in investigative research, it is filled with numerous, intentionally inaccurate information.

Facts are facts and not partisan. Anyone seeing straight facts as partisan is part of the problem in a major way.
 

O' Clarkii Stomias

Active Member
Don't worry about China, they're gonna starve themselves. But meanwhile let's crater our economy in the name of CO2, and we don't like the 1%ers.
Seems like a solid plan! I'm sold.
 

dustinchromers

Active Member
Your proclamation has some merit and I do not disagree as long as the facts are indeed trustworthy. I take it your insinuation needs to be directed toward these folks: https://www.conservapedia.com/Snopes.com

I'm an equal opportunity critic. No matter what side or facet you stand on of we can't agree to certain facts no headway will be made politically, environmentally, or socially. This business of alternative facts ect is both disturbing and idiotic. 2+2 must equal four and we all need to swallow that. Granted many things up for debate are not so black and white but we all need to police our own and others to use hard facts and honour them as such. I can assure you I am just as disgusted by alternative facts or fake news no matter the slant or bias. Parties and people of all stripes are guilty of cooking data and yes, lying. Even so called fact checkers are not immune to this. I also refrain from reading trash as time is the most valuable asset I know so consevapedia or whatever that is there has not made the list of items I'll be spending time on. Do you feel I would defend or stick up for such a wiki type publication?
 
Last edited:

Support WFF | Remove the Ads

Support WFF by upgrading your account. Site supporters benefits include no ads and access to some additional features, few now, more in the works. Info
Top