Xi orders massive new coal mining quota

Status
Not open for further replies.

Swimmy

Well-Known Member
I'm beginning to understand why we can't make any real progress fighting climate change in this country. In the face of record storms, record heat waves, record fires, huge loss of biodiversity, and other horrors, people act like it's a big joke. It pisses me off.

As I mentioned in an earlier post, the great irony with the climate change debate is that Americans are reasonable and we all want clean air, water, etc. And I'd argue we've made incredible "progress." But to your point about it being a joke, here are a couple points to consider from someone who spends as much time outdoors as anyone on this forum and is passionate about the environment.

- The conversation has been hi-jacked by progressives/leftists
- Many of the proposals just aren't reasonable
- Most of the folks driving the narrative are extremely hypocritical
- Too many feel the left is using climate to push another agenda.
- We don't have any faith in the federal gov't to do...well anything. Our political elites have failed us.

Without getting off track, I can apply this same logic to a number of issues. Thoughts?
 

girlfisher

Active Member
How about lowering the age?

aoc-portrait.jpg
 

Canuck from Kansas

WFF Premium
As I mentioned in an earlier post, the great irony with the climate change debate is that Americans are reasonable and we all want clean air, water, etc. And I'd argue we've made incredible "progress." But to your point about it being a joke, here are a couple points to consider from someone who spends as much time outdoors as anyone on this forum and is passionate about the environment.

- The conversation has been hi-jacked by progressives/leftists
- Many of the proposals just aren't reasonable
- Most of the folks driving the narrative are extremely hypocritical
- Too many feel the left is using climate to push another agenda.
- We don't have any faith in the federal gov't to do...well anything. Our political elites have failed us.

Without getting off track, I can apply this same logic to a number of issues. Thoughts?

Well, I've been holding off on this response because I didn't want to get personal, but since you brought up hypocritical and asked for thoughts, the above seems a bit rich coming from the individual whose response to an ongoing drought, from what I can tell is #43 :
  • The "sacrifice" of adhering to hoot owl restrictions or not fishing closed rivers in Montana (a little privilege showing there, adhering to regulations is not a sacrifice, just means you're not a poacher)
  • Continuing to water his lawn, feeding no one but keeping it nice a pleasingly green, because he is "allowed to", meanwhile decrying ranchers and farmers for irrigating land, which they are "allowed" to, that produces the food he eats.
You state conservation is being hijacked from by "progressives/leftists - well, I would argue that's because conservatives let them, where are their proposals, only thing I hear from "conservatives" is denial, they are completely bereft of ideas.

The "we don't have any faith in the federal gov't to do...well anything. Our political elites have failed us" is of course, a self fulfilling prophecy; modern-day "conservatives" and I use that term with great trepidation, have done everything in their power to ensure government doesn't work, and now that it doesn't, you point and say, "see, government doesn't work" - take a look at the 40's, 50's, 60's and even into the 70's, government worked pretty damn well overall, the middle class was built, highway systems, and infrastructure that paved the way for everything we have now. Wasn't until Reagan and the government is the enemy that things started to fall apart - income disparity increased, real wages for workers became stagnant, trickle-down economics (which even the originator admitted was a hoax) - yeah, government doesn't work very well for everyday folks, and I would argue it was/is so-called "conservatives" that have done everything they can to make it so.

Anyways, you asked.

cheers
 

Chris Bellows

Your Preferred WFF Poster
Well, I've been holding off on this response because I didn't want to get personal, but since you brought up hypocritical and asked for thoughts, the above seems a bit rich coming from the individual whose response to an ongoing drought, from what I can tell is #43 :
  • The "sacrifice" of adhering to hoot owl restrictions or not fishing closed rivers in Montana (a little privilege showing there, adhering to regulations is not a sacrifice, just means you're not a poacher)
  • Continuing to water his lawn, feeding no one but keeping it nice a pleasingly green, because he is "allowed to", meanwhile decrying ranchers and farmers for irrigating land, which they are "allowed" to, that produces the food he eats.
You state conservation is being hijacked from by "progressives/leftists - well, I would argue that's because conservatives let them, where are their proposals, only thing I hear from "conservatives" is denial, they are completely bereft of ideas.

The "we don't have any faith in the federal gov't to do...well anything. Our political elites have failed us" is of course, a self fulfilling prophecy; modern-day "conservatives" and I use that term with great trepidation, have done everything in their power to ensure government doesn't work, and now that it doesn't, you point and say, "see, government doesn't work" - take a look at the 40's, 50's, 60's and even into the 70's, government worked pretty damn well overall, the middle class was built, highway systems, and infrastructure that paved the way for everything we have now. Wasn't until Reagan and the government is the enemy that things started to fall apart - income disparity increased, real wages for workers became stagnant, trickle-down economics (which even the originator admitted was a hoax) - yeah, government doesn't work very well for everyday folks, and I would argue it was/is so-called "conservatives" that have done everything they can to make it so.

Anyways, you asked.

cheers

Winner, winner. Hard for the debate to not be hijacked when the other side either disputes the facts or doesn't give a crap (language tempered for the sensitive souls here).

Wonder how long my house on the coast will remain in Zone X.
 

girlfisher

Active Member
Someone other than old dudes as president would be refreshing
I can appreciate a breath of orginal thought into this thread. Most presidents try to surround themselves with advisors that help them make the best decisions. I would argue that good presidents have inclusive staffs with people of color, various genders, and a mixture of old and "young". I am not a fan of our current President because he lacks environmental back-bone and vision. This position has little to do with his age, IMHO. For the most part he models his practice after a younger and far more popular, Obama.

Forty-five represented an image that quickly became a cult. He represented the last chance for old and young white people to hang on to outdated beliefs. His age had little to do with his worshipers and believe me they would cut him off at the ankles if he deviated from their norms.

Please remember that the old fart, Bernie Sanders, had the youth vote on his side because they believed in his vision and cared little about his age.

Our current congressional mess has little to do with age and a lot to do with pure and simple obstructionism! Yes, Moscow Mitch is a fossil, as you put it but his young counterparts follow lock step and refuse to think for themselves. Add to this a fairly young Manchin and Sinema who's ideologies are based on the highest bidder.
 

dustinchromers

Active Member
@Roper just to clarify, I am saying male or female, someone a good bit younger than the last two fossils would be something refreshing. I'd like to personally see the top office and many top electable spots capped at 70 years old, more like 65. Hell, maybe 60.

Old guys, outdated stale, dangerous dirty politics, imho. In this era, youth really is where the direction is, that voice is needed loudly. It's their planet they inherit.

The next election so far looks to be late 70's versus an 80 something year old? God bless old folks, but same old politics is not aging well.

While I agree fresh ideas are welcome I would also caution you about ageism. I'm not a Biden fan however I find it distasteful to pick on the guy for being old and therefore stupid. Older people aren't stupid by in large. We live in one of the few cultures that puts our senior population out to pasture and overlook their wisdom and disrespect them. I don't like that and think it's at major peril. And I'm not picking on you as I don't see you as ageist but I figured someone should make a point of caution. With luck and health we will all grow older and the universe has a funny way of teaching us the hard lessons we didn't learn in youth in that time. I guess the short story is I want an experienced president. That can happen at a variety of ages and experience doesn't wane with age.

@girlfisher I'm back to capacity for reasonably serious discussion. Yesterday was difficult for me for a variety of reasons and often my only defense against the darkness is an equally dark sense of humour. I'm back now and didn't intend to write you off or your conversation points as trivial.
 
Last edited:

Swimmy

Well-Known Member
Well, I've been holding off on this response because I didn't want to get personal, but since you brought up hypocritical and asked for thoughts, the above seems a bit rich coming from the individual whose response to an ongoing drought, from what I can tell is #43 :
  • The "sacrifice" of adhering to hoot owl restrictions or not fishing closed rivers in Montana (a little privilege showing there, adhering to regulations is not a sacrifice, just means you're not a poacher)
  • Continuing to water his lawn, feeding no one but keeping it nice a pleasingly green, because he is "allowed to", meanwhile decrying ranchers and farmers for irrigating land, which they are "allowed" to, that produces the food he eats.

I'm not really following you here

I made a sacrifice, ag didn't. I could've continued to water my lawn but would have been charged a premium. I chose not to.

That's hypocritical? Ok.

The "we don't have any faith in the federal gov't to do...well anything. Our political elites have failed us" is of course, a self fulfilling prophecy; modern-day "conservatives" and I use that term with great trepidation, have done everything in their power to ensure government doesn't work, and now that it doesn't, you point and say, "see, government doesn't work" -


$28 Trillion in debt. Look around. You really think that things are great.

And I don't really care who you blame. But do you support spending 5 Trillion on top of the already Trillion dollar deficits we are currently running?
 

Rocking Chair Fan

No more hot spotting
IMHO one needs to walk carefully regarding budget deficits. The current budget deficit of $28T is a cumulation of all prior administrations. If it was not for the recession and the pandemic the US deficit would be in a lot better shape than we are now... At the same time less-constrained budget spending and tax cuts by Congress is not helping either...

20210114-borrowing-increased-under-trump-despite-promise-to-repay-national-debt-small.png
 
Last edited:

Canuck from Kansas

WFF Premium
I'm not really following you here

I made a sacrifice, ag didn't. I could've continued to water my lawn but would have been charged a premium. I chose not to.

That's hypocritical? Ok.




$28 Trillion in debt. Look around. You really think that things are great.

And I don't really care who you blame. But do you support spending 5 Trillion on top of the already Trillion dollar deficits we are currently running?

Watering your lawn only according to what you are allowed without paying a premium is NOT a sacrifice!!! Nor is not fishing closed waters. Ag only did what you did, ie, watered according to what they were are allowed, the difference being they produced something you consume, you produced nothing with your lawn that others consumed.

Did I say things were "great" (can't find where I said that - you seem to be putting words in my mouth).

I do not support trillion dollar deficits, funny thing though, deficits seem to go up under Republican administrations, then under Democratic administrations deficits stabilize then tend to go down (see Clinton and Obama vs Reagan, Bush, Bush, and Trump - too early top tell under Biden yet, but his proposals are that the spending will be paid for, unlike Republicans, who keep insisting tax cuts will pay for themselves despite that this has never happened).

cheers
 

DimeBrite

5X Celebrity Jeopardy Champion
It's tough to pass such large and consequential legislation when Congress is about 50:50 between the two parties. Most of the current proposals in the $3.5 Trillion bill would do nothing to improve the climate, it's 90% social program wish list. This bill is now $1.75 Trillion and shrinking as negotiations grind onward. It would have been smarter to have proposed a series of individual smaller bills.
 

Canuck from Kansas

WFF Premium
It's tough to pass such large and consequential legislation when Congress is about 50:50 between the two parties. Most of the current proposals in the $3.5 Trillion bill would do nothing to improve the climate, it's 90% social program wish list. This bill is now $1.75 Trillion and shrinking as negotiations grind onward. It would have been smarter to have proposed a series of individual smaller bills.

You are I think partly correct, the problem being, they only get a couple of kicks at the reconciliation can, that's why it's all in one bill, or that's my understanding.

cheers
 

Rocking Chair Fan

No more hot spotting
It's tough to pass such large and consequential legislation when Congress is about 50:50 between the two parties. Most of the current proposals in the $3.5 Trillion bill would do nothing to improve the climate, it's 90% social program wish list. This bill is now $1.75 Trillion and shrinking as negotiations grind onward. It would have been smarter to have proposed a series of individual smaller bills.

I do not disagree with you if Congress was 'working'.

But considering what Congress can do/won't do, passing smaller bills would be hard. That is where reconciliation comes into play or changing the filibustering rule.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

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

Latest posts

Top