My first thought when seeing this was "OH! There must be new science." That does not seem to be the case. I'm going to need to adjust my understanding of how the world works.
I suspect that the "Champion of Beautiful, Clean Coal" is just living up to his side of the contract.[0]
Yep. Toilet schedules for every department should go through Congress, apparently. It's a deliberate design to flood an already very narrow zone, lawmaking.
You can't have one party whose goal it to make sure government doesn't function in order to push their policy of 'shrink government' be in charge of making government function. No system will work when half the system is hostile to the system.
If the Republicans will happy spend money until we are all broke if it means we can limit the government's spending (huh? what? make that make sense) they will break it all (and are trying) in whatever way they can.
Wouldn't this increase US exposure to foreign intervention in the future? Although China is the worst offender, since a while now they are getting their stuff together. They suffered and later fixed some gross air pollutions in their cities.
The rest of the world is also pretty much on board with this clean air and climate change stuff as it turns out people generally like clean air, so if this sticks at some point the only logical next step would be to compel US to stop polluting the world.
If I understand correctly, this also removes EPA ability to regulate car emissions, arguing that it will allow for cheaper cars. Why would US public really wants newly made clunkers on their cities? Polluting cars are horrible city life quality downgrade that even the rich can't escape.
Also, will this allow to put the banned due to the dieselgate VW vehicles back on the roads?
China was an offender at the time yes. But even so, since 1980, when effects of climate change were first known, US has emitted 250Gt and China only 263 Gt, which in per capita terms places US at 690t/p and China at 185 t/p. This is despite China having one child policy since 1979 (which by the way has been heavily criticized by the US).
In all, the case for US being the real villain here keeps getting stronger and stronger.
I don’t know by what means foreign countries would intervene in the US. They’d just ignore whatever is requested of them.
But it will increase US dependency on foreign countries in the long term. EVs are the future and if US manufacturers aren’t working on them then they’ll continue to lose market share to foreign companies.
The rest of the world is not on board. Western Europe, United States, and Australia take “breathing considered harmful“ seriously. No other country does, and nobody else is deliberately suppressing their growth. There are plenty of countries taking western money to pretend that they do.
> The rest of the world is also pretty much on board with this clean air and climate change stuff as it turns out people generally like clean air
Are you sure about that? Or you mistaking the world's opinion for that of the out-of-touch elites living in their lofty ivory towers? Because in the world, outside the media controlled by these elites, I see the exact opposite: it turns out THE WORLD generally like electricity at 2 cents per kwh (not 50 cents how elites like it), no matter how much carbon dioxide it emits.
One step forward, two steps backwards. Anything good the Democrats may do (yes, it happens sometimes, rarely) will immediately get repelled by the death cult that are the Republicans. If for no other reasons that to "own the libs", they would destroy the whole world.
If this country is to have any future, it must get rid of the Republican party, try all its officials for treason to the American people and ideals of the US Republic and constitution, then disenfranchise their alienated voter base until they get back to living in material reality.
How exactly is this not just like a global policy thing rather than EPA? Surely our emissions affect other countries' qualities of life so the decision is not just up to us.
Beyond its role in climate change, elevated concentrations of CO₂ pose a direct physiological threat to human health, ranging from inflammation to respiratory stress. The Trump presidency is trying to protect coal and oil for some reason. Money, lobbying, bribery anyone?
We need to look past the political noise and focus on the immediate data: CO₂ is a pollutant that harms human physiology. Regardless of where you stand on climate policy, we should all agree that breathing toxic air is unacceptable. We need to prioritize respiratory health and cognitive safety above partisan loyalty
This is a bad take. CO2 will not harm your personal health in the short term, in the amounts measured in current atmospheric readings. You personally have a higher percentage of CO2 in your body every time you breathe. You currently breathe about 430 ppm of CO2. Toxic levels are above 5000 ppm (40000 is regarded as immediately dangerous).
You're arguing the right side but you're using the wrong arguments. This is actually counter productive.
Trump has a couple of more years left on this planet. He'll never see the effects of his policies, but he'll do everything to please his donors. That's about it.
CFCs are bad because they make the government get cancer. CO2 is fine because it'll make your grandchildren die in a heatwave or drown in a flood, that won't happen in the next few election cycles.
The protests have been consistent since the regime took office. There's been two attempts on his life. Blue states are implementing measures to basically soft secede from the federal government. Republican candidates are losing in landslides and the regimes secret police are being confronted as soon as they're identified. Idk where you get 'complacent' from.
It's clear from this comment that you do not understand the complexities of US politics. If you don't have something useful to contribute, I'd recommend spending your time understanding the political system here, the generational propaganda machine, and why it isn't simply a matter of every politically conscious individual going outside and protesting. People are already protesting all over the country and he's not out of office. There have even been assassination attempts.
Maybe you weren't paying attention for the last month. The president's secret police have killed several civilians in broad daylight, in some cases specifically because these people were trying to help others who were being attacked. You have no idea what the fuck is going on here, honestly, and your comment is as ignorant as it is unwarranted.
> What happened to the protests? The indignation? Get rid of this guy already you complacent fucks
I'm just reminding that this is exactly what Americans voted him to do. And in their opinion, the main problem is that he does what he does not effectively enough.
You’re comparing an extreme minority on one side to the mainstream view on the other.
Democrats are not banning everything related to fossil fuels, nor do they disrupt public life. They have simply applied subsidies to encourage environmental friendly choices. Which is exactly the middle ground you are asking for.
> and impose its ideology on others (e.g., Klima Klebers in Germany)
what does "impose its ideology" mean?
they were protesting for the government to uphold their own promises and use low hanging fruits which are even beneficial beyond reducing green house gases.
Are you sure it's not just media magnifying the extremes? In my own bubble and honestly most of what I see online most people seem to believe in a middle ground.
The problem is that there isn't really a middle ground. The damage is done and no actions taken now will have a quick, politically measurable effect. The people arguing against action are relying on the delay between action and effect. If you can't see it now (despite actual measurable data being available for at least the last 2 decades) then it must be a lie.
I'm still not sure what the climate change denialists see as the goal of "big climate". All of the money and profit is on the side of continuing to fuck the climate. All of the projects to alleviate the problem are expensive and have very little profit to be gained, but apparently it's a conspiracy of academics on minimum wage in various university research centers who are determined to take the money from our wonderful oil and mining benefactors (who have nothing but our best interests at heart). What's worse is they want to push technology that gives us energy for free! Must be a bunch of communists or something!
mapontosevenths|16 days ago
I suspect that the "Champion of Beautiful, Clean Coal" is just living up to his side of the contract.[0]
[0] https://www.budget.senate.gov/chairman/newsroom/press/budget...
_heimdall|16 days ago
If only it wasn't being cherry picked to neuter the EPA while Border Patrol and ICE take it upon themselves to act as police forces on domestic soil.
actionfromafar|16 days ago
_DeadFred_|16 days ago
If the Republicans will happy spend money until we are all broke if it means we can limit the government's spending (huh? what? make that make sense) they will break it all (and are trying) in whatever way they can.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starve_the_beast
someguydave|16 days ago
davidguetta|16 days ago
ozzymuppet|16 days ago
st_goliath|16 days ago
EDIT: and it's gone. From #1 on the front page to page 14 or so in about 35 minutes. To be honest, that took a lot longer than I expected.
rcMgD2BwE72F|16 days ago
throwway262515|16 days ago
mrtksn|16 days ago
The rest of the world is also pretty much on board with this clean air and climate change stuff as it turns out people generally like clean air, so if this sticks at some point the only logical next step would be to compel US to stop polluting the world.
If I understand correctly, this also removes EPA ability to regulate car emissions, arguing that it will allow for cheaper cars. Why would US public really wants newly made clunkers on their cities? Polluting cars are horrible city life quality downgrade that even the rich can't escape.
Also, will this allow to put the banned due to the dieselgate VW vehicles back on the roads?
trueismywork|16 days ago
In all, the case for US being the real villain here keeps getting stronger and stronger.
Erwin|16 days ago
afavour|16 days ago
But it will increase US dependency on foreign countries in the long term. EVs are the future and if US manufacturers aren’t working on them then they’ll continue to lose market share to foreign companies.
kasey_junk|16 days ago
GorbachevyChase|16 days ago
Ray20|16 days ago
Are you sure about that? Or you mistaking the world's opinion for that of the out-of-touch elites living in their lofty ivory towers? Because in the world, outside the media controlled by these elites, I see the exact opposite: it turns out THE WORLD generally like electricity at 2 cents per kwh (not 50 cents how elites like it), no matter how much carbon dioxide it emits.
intexpress|16 days ago
y0ssar1an|16 days ago
thrance|16 days ago
If this country is to have any future, it must get rid of the Republican party, try all its officials for treason to the American people and ideals of the US Republic and constitution, then disenfranchise their alienated voter base until they get back to living in material reality.
cbg0|16 days ago
padjo|16 days ago
Madmallard|16 days ago
apothegm|16 days ago
blondie9x|16 days ago
We need to look past the political noise and focus on the immediate data: CO₂ is a pollutant that harms human physiology. Regardless of where you stand on climate policy, we should all agree that breathing toxic air is unacceptable. We need to prioritize respiratory health and cognitive safety above partisan loyalty
https://open.substack.com/pub/minimallysustained/p/beyond-th...
Intermernet|16 days ago
You're arguing the right side but you're using the wrong arguments. This is actually counter productive.
GorbachevyChase|16 days ago
[deleted]
TrackerFF|16 days ago
malfist|16 days ago
1attice|16 days ago
ChrisArchitect|16 days ago
typedef_struct|16 days ago
baq|16 days ago
oulipo2|16 days ago
pluc|16 days ago
[deleted]
sheikhnbake|16 days ago
soulofmischief|16 days ago
Maybe you weren't paying attention for the last month. The president's secret police have killed several civilians in broad daylight, in some cases specifically because these people were trying to help others who were being attacked. You have no idea what the fuck is going on here, honestly, and your comment is as ignorant as it is unwarranted.
Ray20|16 days ago
I'm just reminding that this is exactly what Americans voted him to do. And in their opinion, the main problem is that he does what he does not effectively enough.
sajithdilshan|16 days ago
[deleted]
afavour|16 days ago
Democrats are not banning everything related to fossil fuels, nor do they disrupt public life. They have simply applied subsidies to encourage environmental friendly choices. Which is exactly the middle ground you are asking for.
tcfhgj|16 days ago
what does "impose its ideology" mean?
they were protesting for the government to uphold their own promises and use low hanging fruits which are even beneficial beyond reducing green house gases.
AlecSchueler|16 days ago
Intermernet|16 days ago
I'm still not sure what the climate change denialists see as the goal of "big climate". All of the money and profit is on the side of continuing to fuck the climate. All of the projects to alleviate the problem are expensive and have very little profit to be gained, but apparently it's a conspiracy of academics on minimum wage in various university research centers who are determined to take the money from our wonderful oil and mining benefactors (who have nothing but our best interests at heart). What's worse is they want to push technology that gives us energy for free! Must be a bunch of communists or something!