The Green New Deal

[TheramoreIsTheBomb]

While I am in big agreement with anything to help the environment I kind of take it as smoke being blown. All it takes is America to want their every 4 to 8 year "desire for change" to put a Republican in office and it just seems like we convert to burning oil and coal a lot faster than we move away from it.

Republicans have proven time and time again that they're incapable of governing... Reagen's racism and economy Senior. W. Bush with 9/11 and the war.. and most recently Trump with all of the recent bs.

[Felya]

Republicans have proven time and time again that they're incapable of governing... Reagen's racism and economy Senior. W. Bush with 9/11 and the war.. and most recently Trump with all of the recent bs.

I don’t know what to tell you my friend... but, I really want to disagree.

[Felya]

But while it might be better to take it 'more seriously', my only mention was that Republicans on average better estimate the risks involved.

No, they didn’t. They downplayed the virus and are now trying to take credit for knowing that their inaction, would be superseded by people who gave a shit.

And that Democrat mainstream media is going into overdrive exaggerating.

If mainstream media listened to republicans, the numbers would have been worse than either thought. This is an argument of liars...

It's also not just about the mortality rate but also about the hospitalization rate. The initial point of discussion was whether or the science was really considered, yet the side who keeps moaning about science, completely unaware of how politically biased it is, isn't always as science-aware as they believe they are and despite their claim to science not always as grounded in reality as the side who does things more based on tradition and common sense.

This is bullshit... people who believed in science took action, because they didn’t want the expected numbers. Now liars who didn’t do shit, but spread the virus, are trying to take credit for the work everyone else did. How pathetic...

Science doesn't hold all the answers.

In this regard it did, because enough people listened, to have better than expected results. We didn’t ignore the virus, as GOP demanded. We listened to science, but you want to take credit for doing nothing? For the labour of others?

There's multiple western countries where the restrictions are nowhere near as strict as they should be, or as strict as I'd like them to be, because various industries are on edge of rioting / revolting if their trade is going to remain locked down: restaurants, pubs, brothels, hairdressers, etc.

If republicans were right, why are you saying this? If republicans were right, why would you want things that Democrats demanded, like more strict regulations? Nice gaslighting...

[Shadowferal]

But while it might be better to take it 'more seriously', my only mention was that Republicans on average better estimate the risks involved. And that Democrat mainstream media is going into overdrive exaggerating.

And the "Republican mainstream media" was touting injecting disinfectants such as bleach as a cure for covid19. Considering how many didn't vote for Republicans perhaps they did just that.

[Felya]

And the "Republican mainstream media" was touting injecting disinfectants such as bleach as a cure for covid19. Considering how many didn't vote for them perhaps they did just that.

It’s double talk... if republicans were right about predictions and science is not right in this case... why does he want it taken more seriously?

Similar to his last sentence...

If GOP knew the risks better, why is he still asking to do the opposite, by wanting more restrictions?

It’s either gaslighting, or a need to defend republicans due to extreme personal bias, even when their own opinion differs.

Edit: ‘Science is wrong, but I still want more restrictions. Republicans were right, but we should take it more seriously.’ That doesn’t make any sense... if republicans were right and science wrong, why is he still talking about doing what science said?

[Machismo]

That is true.

But while it might be better to take it 'more seriously', my only mention was that Republicans on average better estimate the risks involved. And that Democrat mainstream media is going into overdrive exaggerating. It's also not just about the mortality rate but also about the hospitalization rate. The initial point of discussion was whether or the science was really considered, yet the side who keeps moaning about science, completely unaware of how politically biased it is, isn't always as science-aware as they believe they are and despite their claim to science not always as grounded in reality as the side who does things more based on tradition and common sense.

Science doesn't hold all the answers.

There's multiple western countries where the restrictions are nowhere near as strict as they should be, or as strict as I'd like them to be, because various industries are on edge of rioting / revolting if their trade is going to remain locked down: restaurants, pubs, brothels, hairdressers, etc.

Ummm, no they didn't... this is a fucking lie.

This is as big of a lie as when you pushed your fake concern about sexual assault, before cheering on Trump and his sexual assaults.

It's as big of a lie as when you said you weren't a Trump supporter, but then supported Trump.

It's as big of a lie as when you said you were moving to Florida to vote.

It's as big of a lie as when you swore Biden wasn't progressive enough for you, then you went full alt-righter in front of everyone.

So, why should anyone believe anything you ever say?

[Felya]

Ummm, no they didn't... this is a fucking lie.

Just to point out, Herman Cain still tweets that he was right about covid. That’s what that poll means in a nutshell...

Edit: If people want to see what the right, being right about covid means... don’t look at US, where people effectively stood up to Trump and his thugs. Look at India and Brazil, where there was no strong counter to right wing policy. That’s what happens when their estimates are acted on...

[Machismo]

Just to point out, Herman Cain still tweets that he was right about covid. That’s what that poll means in a nutshell...

Well, if anyone would know that Covid isn't nearly as bad as people think, it would be Herman Cain.

[Fluttershy]

This green new deal/climate change is just a scam to line up corporation pockets. But I don't mind too much, I'm just investing heavily in silver miners and uranium since those will be cornerstones of removing the carbon boogieman. I'll make mad bank.

[Felya]

Well, if anyone would know that Covid isn't nearly as bad as people think, it would be Herman Cain.

I just miss tact that was harder to tell. Everyone just crutches Tim Pool style, which at this point is so over used, it’s basic. An argument shouldn’t be formed on a premise of a bunch of horrible rhetoric, that then gets justified by one reasonable statement. Everyone should already be keen to this tact.

When Peterson was rising, we would get these massive posts, with references to Jung and ancient social structures. You needed to think at least a little bit, because that was a lot of foundation. You had to notice the shifts or the inconsistency being subtle. Now in the era of Tim Pool conservatives... it’s a jackhammer... His first tweet... “Voting rights for all!”... followed by second tweet “can only be achieved with a fully armed society. Free guns for all!”...

Philistine...

- - - Updated - - -

This green new deal/climate change is just a scam to line up corporation pockets.

Then why do corporations spend fortunes to lobby against it?

Edit: I don’t understand why I should listen to oil and coal, telling me that greens new deal is bad, because it helps corporations. Should I also listen to republicans who want to cancel MLB judicially, while complaining about corporations... or should I look at a former Exxon CEO being a Secretary of State, just 4 years ago? How about 4 years of a real estate mogul, NYC oligarch, as president?

We are in an age when being populist, requires a bit more specifics... we literally just had a NYC elite pretend to be populist and like 70+ million people bought it.

[Howel]

Now in the era of Tim Pool conservatives... it’s a jackhammer... His first tweet... “Voting rights for all!”... followed by second tweet “can only be achieved with a fully armed society. Free guns for all!”...

Wait, is that real?

[Fluttershy]

I just miss tact that was harder to tell. Everyone just crutches Tim Pool style, which at this point is so over used, it’s basic. An argument shouldn’t be formed on a premise of a bunch of horrible rhetoric, that then gets justified by one reasonable statement. Everyone should already be keen to this tact.

When Peterson was rising, we would get these massive posts, with references to Jung and ancient social structures. You needed to think at least a little bit, because that was a lot of foundation. You had to notice the shifts or the inconsistency being subtle. Now in the era of Tim Pool conservatives... it’s a jackhammer... His first tweet... “Voting rights for all!”... followed by second tweet “can only be achieved with a fully armed society. Free guns for all!”...

Philistine...

- - - Updated - - -



Then why do corporations spend fortunes to lobby against it?

Edit: I don’t understand why I should listen to oil and coal, telling me that greens new deal is bad, because it helps corporations. Should I also listen to republicans who want to cancel MLB judicially, while complaining about corporations... or should I look at a former Exxon CEO being a Secretary of State, just 4 years ago? How about 4 years of a real estate mogul, NYC oligarch, as president?

We are in an age when being populist, requires a bit more specifics... we literally just had a NYC elite pretend to be populist and like 70+ million people bought it.

Because corporations aren't a hivemind? they're not all single entities allied to each other, scheming to rip you off.

[Shalcker]

It’s double talk... if republicans were right about predictions and science is not right in this case... why does he want it taken more seriously?

The problem is... Republicans are more right about/aligned with what science says then Democrats. Educated ones more so. Democrats largely move away from scientific consensus toward fearmongering territory.

That's what those polls above say.

[Shadowferal]

The problem is... Republicans are more right about/aligned with what science says then Democrats. Educated ones more so. Democrats largely move away from scientific consensus toward fearmongering territory. That's what those polls above say.

Pfft...there are less republican voters these days thanks to their idiotic beliefs.

[Howel]

The problem is... Republicans are more right about/aligned with what science says then Democrats. Educated ones more so. Democrats largely move away from scientific consensus toward fearmongering territory.

That's what those polls above say.

That's not what those polls say. Those polls are statistics, which are then parallel with what people estimate it to be; which you'll notice they both overestimate and underestimate, often within a single percentage point.

And I might also add, that a half a million people dead, several more having had to be hospitalized, and many more will have either long term or chronical issues; would warrant that people overestimate it via "fearmongering". You don't get a special prize for being slightly less wrong about the exact number then others, as it is still ravaging several people's lives.

That's a special kind of logic to run, especially since that kind of attitude would make the likelihood of it rising to a level where you are no longer right, bigger.

Edit: it is also kind of funny, because Republicans might have slightly less overestimated or underestimated the numbers, but then fail in accessing if it was a big number comparatively by a whole other magnitude.

[Shalcker]

That's not what those polls say. Those polls are statistics, which are then parallel with what people estimate it to be; which you'll notice they both overestimate and underestimate, often within a single percentage point.

Yes, statistics that say what i told above. Certainly neither side is perfect.

But you would expect Republicans to be more wrong given their attitudes - which is not what we're seeing.

And I might also add, that a half a million people dead, several more having had to be hospitalized, and many more will have either long term or chronical issues; would warrant that people overestimate it via "fearmongering". You don't get a special prize for being slightly less wrong about the exact number then others, as it is still ravaging several people's lives.

Maybe the problem is that accurate perception of threat can produce suboptimal responses?

Where your individual assessment of threat to yourself can be perfectly correct, and yet in aggregate more people die.

Maybe it is extreme individualism that is the problem, not scientific accuracy.

[Howel]

Yes, statistics that say what i told above. Certainly neither side is perfect.

But you would expect Republicans to be more wrong given their attitudes - which is not what we're seeing.

They are in certain aspects (most notably the capabilities of the spread, and what the actual death number is comparative), mostly due to that sphere having run a heavy spin on not being that problematic or downplaying it (which one the of course can argue the opposite happened for Democrats). Now I will still give these people credit, where it is due, that they actually still do overestimate it and seemingly also acted upon that, even if we look at how some of their representatives have acted as if it is completely without danger or overblown.

Maybe the problem is that accurate perception of threat can produce suboptimal responses?

Where your individual assessment of threat to yourself can be perfectly correct, and yet in aggregate more people die.

Maybe it is extreme individualism that is the problem, not scientific accuracy.

That is a possibility. It only runs into the problem, that when it comes to communicable disease, what doesn't affect you, can still spread to those that can, which where that notion of as long as I am correct in it not being dangerous to me it is fine.

[Felya]

Wait, is that real?

Yes, a couple of people on this forum said it... so I tried to find who they were copying, since it was such a uniquely stupid comment. There it was...

[Elegiac]

Yes, statistics that say what i told above. Certainly neither side is perfect.

But you would expect Republicans to be more wrong given their attitudes - which is not what we're seeing.

The infection and death rates in red states indicate otherwise, sweaty.

Also y'all really out here claiming that exercising too much caution is the same thing as not exercising enough caution, huh?

[Felya]

The infection and death rates in red states indicate otherwise, sweaty.

Also y'all really out here claiming that exercising too much caution is the same thing as not exercising enough caution, huh?

The suicide rates they claimed as part of their feelings, didn’t happen... they were wrong.

This is one of the most bizarre attempts to say they were right, I have ever seen. After the bleach, the chloroquine, the demon sperm, the literally lying about it, the open up riots, the refusal to take precautions and now vaccine denialism... They want to say they were close to being right, than people who actually worked to prove them selfs wrong?

What Democrats should have done, is downplayed the virus just a little less than republicans. So that when our number were the same as Brazil or India, Democrats could take credit for being closest to being right.

You know what else is interesting... While doing nothing and spreading misinformation... they knew there would be around 600000 dead... death cult.

When they were attacking nurses, in their open up riots... they knew more than 600000 would die. When they were demanding hair cuts and mocha latte, they knew the price was 600000 dead... death cult.