US Politics

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
But the flip side is, all these Trump voters, the ones who really don't believe in climate change, science, equality etc, how shafted and disillusioned are they going to feel if an Obama 2 becomes president in 4 years time?
That seems to be the central issue here. Over the last 70 years the US has slowly split into two ideologically incompatible cultural nations that can't unite under one leader unless there's a bigger external threat. ie war.
 
That really is the issue. We are so deeply divided it doesn't matter. I don't think there is one person who exists in this world who both sides of this country could be OK with.
 
Because of Republican opposition, the US never ratified the Kyoto Protocol (Canada withdrew). Still, it's been ratified by almost all nations and has largely been a success.
The truth is, as has been pointed out earlier, more money is to be made by investing in green economies than to continue to exploit fossil fuels and other resources.



Yes, but that requires forward thinking, they are entirely too lazy for that.

They want to wear helmets with flashlights, hold a pick ax, come home to their wives frying chicken, and watch Archie Bunker.
 
They want to wear helmets with flashlights, hold a pick ax, come home to their wives frying chicken, and watch Archie Bunker.

I'm not sure (most of) those who used to work in the coal industry but are now out of a job want to return mining coal. It isn't the most pleasant (and healthy) work after all. But they do want to have a job, one which gives them their feeling of self-worth back.
I read, a while back, that there are now more jobs in the clean energy industry than there ever were in coal. But I suspect that those jobs aren't in the former coal-mining regions and/or require skills former miners don't have.
 
I'm not sure (most of) those who used to work in the coal industry but are now out of a job want to return mining coal. It isn't the most pleasant (and healthy) work after all. But they do want to have a job, one which gives them their feeling of self-worth back.

I read, a while back, that there are now more jobs in the clean energy industry than there ever were in coal. But I suspect that those jobs aren't in the former coal-mining regions and/or require skills former miners don't have.



I get that. But bringing coal back was a cornerstone of his campaign. They don't seem to understand the idea of forward thinking and job training programs that would have helped everyone in the long run. Nor do they understand that voting for coal while cutting back on healthcare kills them.
 
Last edited:
But coal fits the narrative. Hard men, and it is men, doing hard gritty work, rolling up their sleeves, sweat on grimy skin, smoke-belching power plants. Cause that's his demographic, those are the people he was targeting. MAGA and just, GRRRRR
 
I believe that climate change is very real, human-borne, and humanity's greatest existential crisis at the moment. As such, I believe in robust government action to fight it.

That said, I think we should be a little more charitable to those who do not share this view. I disagree with them, and wish they'd change their minds, very strongly. But a lot of why the opposition exists comes down to what I perceive to be real incentives. There's a reason why the world hasn't switched en masse to renewable energy and electric cars powered by it - economically, if you take out externalities, fossil fuels are still really cheaper. A switch to alternative energy somebody has to pay for. Even if that somebody is the government, it still has a result of lower consumption in the short run. This is especially true in an environment when oil is cheap and natural gas (main source of modern electric power) is really, really cheap.

This is magnified in areas whose economies depend heavily on fossil fuels - coal country and oil/gas territory. I see it a lot - my parents are heavily dependent on oil/gas, and so are many of my friends and their families. Hell, although I work for a diversified management consulting firm, even a substantial amount of our revenue comes from oil/gas, and I've done work for companies in that space.

These are not valid reasons to believe that climate change is fake. But fighting climate change entails real costs - real human costs - real reductions in standards of living for a non-trivial number of people. You could say that such people are being selfish and thinking too short term in their views, and you wouldn't be wrong. But I think it's worth a little more grace than to call them just stupid or ignorant or fact-deniers or whatever. I'd hazard a guess that that sort of language contributes to the rise of Trump types.
 
That said, I think we should be a little more charitable to those who do not share this view.



I can be charitable to those that just don't get it, but I cannot be charitable to those that purposefully bury their heads in the sand and choose ideology over fact. Orangeoropa, is a perfect example; he knew science, he chose party. The horse, he once labeled science as socialism. No, I will NOT be charitable to this type of ignorance.
 
well my dad believes that "climate change is human made and we got to reduce CO2 output" thing is a conspiracy what should i do
 
he clearly forgot what he was trying to say halfway through it, got confused and pressed send out of habit and went to sleep. it was after midnight. he's sundowning if you ask me. i watched my grandmother do exactly the same thing.
 
I think it might be partly true, that in some countries politicians are going to rethink. Australia, of all places, has a government that seems to be taking after Trump and the GOP.

Trust me, it's really not that surprising. :lol:
 
And these right wingers used to accuse liberals of normalizing pedophilia and running some kind of twisted sex ring in the basement of DC pizza place
 
The thing that baffles me is that people who oppose climate change for whatever reason all have families. This will have no impact on their lives, but it will affect their children, grandchildren and so on. Don't they care about the quality of life future generations of their families will have? It's mind boggling.
I'm not sure they really believe climate change is a hoax, but I certainly don't think they believe it will get as bad as it is said. They don't have the imagination. And one thing they all trust is their old friends, of which many are fossil fuel execs who have invested in their campaigns for a long time. Loyalty prevails, and the only loyalty they know is the people who got them elected and keep them there.
 
If the U S is out of the Paris agreement and China is in, what does it even mean?


China is in Paris agreement, but on a rampage of building coal fire power plants.




China is getting serious about fighting climate change at home. Abroad, its investments tell a different story

Pakistan’s Thar region is a swath of desert in the country’s south long associated with poverty, drought, famine — and coal.

Now, with some help from China, it could soon power the country.

China has signed billions of dollars in agreements with Pakistan to help the country alleviate its chronic energy shortages, primarily by burning coal. New projects will involve mining billions of tons of the fossil fuel annually in the region — home to some of the world’s biggest coal deposits — and building five new coal-fired plants to help power Karachi, a metropolis of 20 million people about 300 miles away.

Yet critics say they could also fill the country’s air with noxious smog for decades, exacerbating already intense public health crises and contributing to climate change.

China, the world’s biggest greenhouse gas emitter, has in recent years emerged as a global leader in climate action. The country’s use of coal — considered the single biggest contributor to anthropogenic climate change — has dropped every year since 2013, as its investments in renewable energy, especially wind and solar, have soared.

California Gov. Jerry Brown will travel to China this week for an international summit on clean energy, underscoring the country’s growing role as a center of gravity in fighting climate change.

Yet China’s domestic progress belies a spottier record abroad. It is the world's largest exporter of coal-related financing and equipment. Its state-owned companies — backed by state loans and hampered at home by tightening environmental regulations — are involved in nearly 100 coal-fired power projects abroad, in countries including Pakistan, India, Indonesia, Vietnam, Mongolia and Iran.

“What’s going down here is, there’s an overall mandate from the government for companies to go carry out projects abroad, and export their goods — and it’s the most powerful state-owned companies that end up doing that,” said Lauri Myllyvirta, a Beijing-based coal and air pollution expert at Greenpeace. “And so what we’ve seen really reflects the power of the coal industry versus the renewable energy industry within China. What we’ve primarily seen going out of China is coal-fired technology.”

For decades, developed nations including the U.S. helped fund the construction of coal-fired power plants in the developing world. Yet in November 2015, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development’s 34 member states — including the U.S., Japan and many European countries — agreed to restrict financing for the vast majority of overseas coal-fired power plants. The World Bank in effect stopped funding new coal projects for developing nations in 2013.

China, which is a member of the World Bank’s governing organization, but not the OECD, has yet to adopt a similar policy.

Beijing, grappling with slowing economic growth at home, has pushed state-owned firms to seek new markets abroad. In 2013, President Xi Jinping announced “One Belt, One Road,” a massive project that involves infrastructure construction and trade expansion in more than 60 countries across Asia, Europe, northern Africa and the Middle East.

From 2001 to 2016, Chinese firms were involved in 240 coal power projects in those countries, many of which rank among the world’s most vulnerable to the damaging effects of climate change, including heat waves, floods, droughts and melting glaciers.

When the projects are complete, they’ll have a total generating capacity of 251 gigawatts, according to the Global Environmental Institute, a Beijing-based nonprofit. (By contrast, only about 70 gigawatts of solar power was installed globally in 2016. About half of that was in China.)

China’s rhetoric has changed in recent years. In September 2015, Xi, in a joint statement with President Obama, agreed to “recognize the importance of mobilizing climate finance to support low-carbon, climate-resilient development in developing countries.” And last year, China signed the Paris agreement, a historic accord in which 195 countries agreed to curtail climate change by limiting global warming to no more than 2 degrees Celsius above preindustrial levels.

Yet since 2016, China has announced, or begun developing, several new coal projects throughout the world, according to the online magazine Chinadialogue and the nonprofit CEE Bankwatch Network. The projects’ total capacity — more than 52 gigawatts — is more than that of planned coal-plant closures in the U.S. by 2020.

China’s tough domestic standards don’t apply to exports, and few of the projects have clarified their emissions standards. Public information on the projects is scarce.

“There’s hardly any official data on the Chinese side,” said Frank Umbach, associate director of the European Center for Energy and Resource Security at King’s College London. “They’re not willing or interested [in providing it] for obvious reasons.”


Pakistan stands to reap huge rewards from Chinese initiatives. In 2013, the two countries signed the $54-billion China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, a project so vast — involving transportation infrastructure, economic zones and a total of 19 energy projects — that a Pakistani newspaper called it a “Marshall Plan for Pakistan,” referring to the U.S. effort to rebuild Europe after World War II.

The energy projects include several power plants, three-fourths of which will be coal-fired. An estimated $5.8 billion worth of coal power projects are expected to be completed across the country by 2019.

The country has a dire need for inexpensive, efficient power — only 67% of its nearly 200 million people have access to electricity, according to the World Bank. In many ways, coal fills the bill — it’s abundant, cheap and reliable.

Yet the country’s embrace of coal could come at a huge environmental cost. Pakistan currently accounts for less than 1% of total global carbon emissions annually, according to the World Bank, but its emissions are increasing at 3.9% annually.

Pakistani officials say the coal plants will use top-flight emission-reducing technology. But critics say that even the cleanest coal-fired power plants still pollute; many of Thar’s nearly 100,000 people will need to be relocated; and the region has massive solar power potential, making the new coal projects unnecessary.

“No sane person would want electricity from dirty energy sources, even though supercritical technology is used,” Malik Amin Aslam, a former state minister for the environment in Pakistan, told Reuters. "These plants, not being completely free of carbon emissions, will still harm the public health and the country’s environment.”

Xu Yuan, a climate change expert and professor at Chinese University of Hong Kong, said that China’s leaders have learned to prioritize environmental issues when promoting hydropower projects abroad — public backlashes have derailed high-profile projects in Myanmar and Honduras.

But coal-fired power stations are different — they’re not going to kill people immediately or directly,” he said. “They emit pollution, which adds risk to the entire population. In that sense it’s quite different.”

Xu added that China’s government began focusing on domestic environmental issues only after years of intense pressure at home and abroad. Many of China’s coal-fired power plants overseas — and the companies overseeing them — simply don’t see environmental protection as an obligation.

“In my understanding of how the Chinese system works, you have to make sure the problem is visible, not just potential,” he said. “And that’s very sad.”


The term con gets thrown around in here a lot, who is being conned?

Probably no one, people have just chosen a side, and are fueled with blinding hatred, and some bizarre derangement syndrome,
I saw it in the 90s against Bill Clinton,
not so much against W in the 2000s even though that probably is the only real stolen election, I think W got a bit of a pass for a long time because of 911.
I saw it again against Obama,

Now with social media validating this contagion, many people have lost the ability to investigate, evaluate and consider any thing that does support their desired objective.
 
You think that the real problem is that people are suffering from derangement syndrome against Trump?
:applaud:
 
If the U S is out of the Paris agreement and China is in, what does it even mean?


China is in Paris agreement, but on a rampage of building coal fire power plants.







The term con gets thrown around in here a lot, who is being conned?

Probably no one, people have just chosen a side, and are fueled with blinding hatred, and some bizarre derangement syndrome,
I saw it in the 90s against Bill Clinton,
not so much against W in the 2000s even though that probably is the only real stolen election, I think W got a bit of a pass for a long time because of 911.
I saw it again against Obama,

Now with social media validating this contagion, many people have lost the ability to investigate, evaluate and consider any thing that does support their desired objective.
No you're right. Everything about this presidencey is perfectly normal. We're the problem.
 
hardly perfect, certainly a lot issues, and some are legit

Hillary who I strongly supported in 2008, sadly has done nothing since November to make me wish she got elected

there is a lot if real evidence of collusion in the 2016 election cycle, but none of the real noise is about that
 
hardly perfect, certainly a lot issues, and some are legit

Hillary who I strongly supported in 2008, sadly has done nothing since November to make me wish she got elected

there is a lot if real evidence of collusion in the 2016 election cycle, but none of the real noise is about that
Yea it's unfortunate that she wasn't able to pass any meaningful legislation during that time and help change hearts and minds.
 
It's Hillary's fault after losing the electoral college and holding no elected office whatsoever that she has not behaved in a way to make us all regret that Trump is president.

That's the real tragedy here folks.
 
The Paris Treaty pull out should be what anti Trumpers want.
The American people will decide if it happens or not.
 
Billionaire that knows how the blue collar man feels, move the embassy to Jerusalem, Hillary's emails while everyone on his staff is on private servers or unsecured phones, Mexican built wall, ISIS destroyed in 100 days, filling the swamp and handing out ethics waivers, Obama's golfing, we won't be embarrassed internationally... yep no one got conned
 
Last edited:
Hillary who I strongly supported in 2008, sadly has done nothing since November to make me wish she got elected

I dunno, at this point I'd happily vote for a former senator/sec of state/lawyer who sat on her couch for three months and drank chardonnay to numb her angst.
 
I dunno, at this point I'd happily vote for a former senator/sec of state/lawyer who sat on her couch for three months and drank chardonnay to numb her angst.

This election was determined by swing voters, as most elections are,
I know you voted for her in November as most in here that voted did.

I have no idea who I will vote for in 2020, ill have to wait and how things are in 2020, and the candidates.

I think most voters in here only vote one side always.
I happen to be a real swing voter. In the last 5 Presidental elections I have voted Dem 4 times and GOP 1.
Bizarre that all the vitrial and hostility thrown at me in here is coming from people that need votes from people like me to win and have benefited from people like me in 4 of the last 5 elections.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom