The Ultimate 2020 Election / Politics / General News Thread

[Matty44]

No, I’m pretty sure you’re the one who’s confused about astroturfing when it comes to climate change.

How Fossil Fuel Lobbyists Used “Astroturf” Front Groups to Confuse the Public

The top lobbyist for the fossil fuel industry in the western United States secretly ran more than a dozen front groups in an attempt to undermine forward-looking policy on climate change and clean technologies.

www.ucsusa.org

Dude you say "there's no such thing as clean coal" to me, which I have never uttered the phrase, and then you say I've been astroturfed, which I'm pretty positive I haven't been tricked by any fake grassroots organizations into believing anything. I've listened to plenty of scientists discuss their interpretation of climate data and what it really means. That's all.

And I have no doubt that fossil fuel companies don't want more clean energy and lobby hard for their own interests. That doesn't mean everyone who says anything against climate change is a shill of big oil.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[PainDrain]

"The free market and forces of unconstrained capitalism and low taxes will cure all" Doesn't pass the red face test anymore.

And this right here is the major sticking point of libertarianism for me. There is a fanatical and dogmatic view in libertarianism that simply allowing the magical “free market” to cure all evils will suffice. Guess what, there is a huge market for child porn and free labor via slavery; it doesn’t mean these things should be allowed. Such magical BS thinking.

 

[chocomorsel]

If you weren’t so dishonest, you would acknowledge that you are literally just making sht up with no basis whatsoever when you prognosticate about whatever you think a future single payer unit is going to be. Nobody with any single payer plan has said they are going to take Medicare rates and just run with those, and even if they did, a Congress willing to pass a doc fix for 20 yrs straight wouldn’t accept that. And it’s not just for anesthesia only. Nobody knows what the RVUs or conversion factor will be (or whether RVUs or conversion factors will even exist) in a future system, and everything you or I say is ultimately speculative. But the idea that Congress is going to give any specialty a 60-80% pay cut is extremely. fcking. stupid. But if you want to persist with the your non fact based unfounded fearmongering, so be it.

Of course he’s benefited greatly in this “atrocious” system as he calls it.
I got mine!!!

 

[DirtDocMD]

And this right here is the major sticking point of libertarianism for me. There is a fanatical and dogmatic view in libertarianism that simply allowing the magical “free market” to cure all evils will suffice. Guess what, there is a huge market for child porn and free labor via slavery; it doesn’t mean these things should be allowed. Such magical BS thinking.

As George Will would say, you two are like “a pyromaniac in a field of strawmen”. You are LITERALLY refuting assumptions NO ONE has made in this thread.

Who has brought up libertarianism OR “unconstrained capitalism”??

Remember when Govt forced us to buy those crappy CFL bulbs?? Nobody wanted them and they were garbage. People were hoarding incandescent bulbs and using “rough service” bulbs.

Then, when LED bulbs came out, no one needed “Govt mandates” to buy the things. They were OBVIOUSLY better, OBVIOUSLY used less electricity, and OBVIOUSLY saved money. CFL couldn’t compete. Incandescent couldn’t compete. A “better mousetrap” had been built, and people beat a path to their doorway.

 

[PainDrain]

As George Will would say, you are like “a pyromaniac in a field of strawmen”. You are LITERALLY refuting assumptions NO ONE has made in this thread.

Who has brought up libertarianism OR “unconstrained capitalism”??

I believe it was DrDoze when he was describing how absurd Matty’s argument re fossil fuels and market forces.

 

[Matty44]

I believe it was DrDoze when he was describing how absurd Matty’s argument re fossil fuels and market forces.

And you disagree with my argument that the government should fund research and innovation in green technology and that if ever an efficient and effective way of ‘going green’ becomes available than it will edge out fossil fuels? What’s your prescription to rid the world of fossil fuels? Ask AOC to waive her magic wand and banish them?

Seriously, you bash anything that I say if it’s not full on climate catastrophe speak, but what’s your solution? What is the fix to climate change? Do you support the government forcing us to be CO2 emission free by a certain date when the technology to do that isn’t really available?

 

[chocomorsel]

I will say that I've known more than 1 non-white person who came here with plans to stay and got out of here with a quickness after they had a "reality" of America. In a similar vein I lived over seasons in a non-white country where I essentially didn't have to think about being a Black person (or mass shootings, that was another bonus) like I do here. Yet I still came back to America. All that to say that moving, immigrating, etc is often a complex decision. Therefore, the fact that we have a lot of immigrants here doesn't mean that the foundation of racism that this country was built upon has suddenly disappeared.

I am a foreigner. And I do have to say based on my experience and a lot of my families‘ experience is that ignorance is truly bliss. And being a foreign born black person you get treated differently. You get the benefit of the doubt. You’re the “different” black person. You’re not like other Black people. You don’t sound black. Yes I’ve heard all that a lot of times before. Micro aggression is real.

You’re ignorant to a lot of those things as a foreigner that many African-Americans have lived and experienced and seen. That is why you see so many small towns with pockets of Africans who don’t care and are ignoring to the racism. And when some of these racists see that they got hard working black folks around, they change their tune and soften up. They call us a “different” type of black, as if there aren’t many hard working, upstanding AAs around. Africans aren’t afraid of living these small towns like many AA are due to years of maltreatment. That is the advantage us black foreigners have. There are for sure bad apples in every bunch, but I feel like those bad apples in the AA communities are who the media is focused on and we all get lumped in together and unfortunately generalized. You all know. The so called “thugs”.

I have never lived full time in the inner city. But I do own a house in one inner city and spent time there before renting it out. And living there with drugs, poor schools, poverty, no good groceries, only corner stores, no jobs, drug dealers, police everywhere, is like living in a completely different world. Yes, the populace is mostly black. There are black children growing up there surrounded by that, and seeing that from a young age. Of course it messes them up and they are influenced by it.

Nothing like living in a yuppy, rich downtown with bookstores and coffee shops and organic groceries and parks, and hotels and restaurants.

Systemic racism is alive and well. Some of us are just ignorant to it is all. Over the years though a lot of us start seeing it.

 

[BLADEMDA]

The 2 trillion dollars Biden wants to spend on green energy is just food for his base. The money won’t alter climate change but will drive up the cost for energy in the USA. Thus, the 2 trillion is mostly a waste of money designed to benefit special interests while hurting the middle class.

The massive tax increases proposed by Biden will hurt profitability and likely result in lower GDP. But, if those tax increases would help balance the budget the pain would be worth it. Instead, Biden proposes to spend trillions more than we take in as a nation each year. The deficit gets even larger and our currency gets weaker.

I really do understand the reason many on this board dislike Trump and some of his policies but the proposals by Biden seem ridiculous and absurd to me. Social Democrats want a much more government centered approach to our lives. Like in many European nations the govt will provide much more of the necessities of life. That philosophy is very expensive and by itself would require massive tax increases. But, when social democracy is combined with the green new deal the cost is truly staggering and shows a blatant disregard for fiscal restraint or the next generations.

Until the middle class wakes up and realizes the price of these far left policies will be very detrimental to the economy and the US dollar I suspect the far Left will remain in control of the Democrat socialists.

At this point the odds heavily favor the Democrats to take both the Presidency and the Senate as well.

 

[pgg]

fission creates a lot of nuclear waste. Not to mention horrible radioactive environmental issues if there is a meltdown or error.

Fusion (as I understand) has the potential generate none of these risks.

Fusion doesn't generate waste, but it also doesn't generate electricity yet, either.

Fission reactors generate waste because they were designed to. Most early research into fission reactors was done with an eye toward breeding materials that could be used in nuclear weapons. We're stuck with decades-old designs because people freak out about imagined risks and stomp any new system development.

The thorium cycle doesn't really generate much waste at all, and its byproducts are not a significant proliferation risk.

There's no reason not to crash money into developing and building a bunch of them, except for the fact that natural gas and coal are still cheap, and smelly hippies sing about the evils of nuclear energy in their drum circles.

 

[vector2]

Fusion doesn't generate waste, but it also doesn't generate electricity yet, either.

Fission reactors generate waste because they were designed to. Most early research into fission reactors was done with an eye toward breeding materials that could be used in nuclear weapons. We're stuck with decades-old designs because people freak out about imagined risks and stomp any new system development.

The thorium cycle doesn't really generate much waste at all, and its byproducts are not a significant proliferation risk.

There's no reason not to crash money into developing and building a bunch of them, except for the fact that natural gas and coal are still cheap, and smelly hippies sing about the evils of nuclear energy in their drum circles.

To be fair it’s not like anyone on either side is really beating down the door nowadays to ramp up nuclear

 

[Bryan O’Blivion]

Fusion doesn't generate waste, but it also doesn't generate electricity yet, either.

Fission reactors generate waste because they were designed to. Most early research into fission reactors was done with an eye toward breeding materials that could be used in nuclear weapons. We're stuck with decades-old designs because people freak out about imagined risks and stomp any new system development.

The thorium cycle doesn't really generate much waste at all, and its byproducts are not a significant proliferation risk.

There's no reason not to crash money into developing and building a bunch of them, except for the fact that natural gas and coal are still cheap, and smelly hippies sing about the evils of nuclear energy in their drum circles.

So, I’m in agreement that nuclear power is probably the best option. But just to play devil’s advocate, thorium hasn’t really ever been actually used, right? The Molten-Salt reactor at Oak Ridge National Lab didn’t actually use thorium unless I’m mistaken.

The ITER fusion project in France has been consuming attention and electricity for years, without any indication that it will successfully produce more electricity than it consumes. One has to be careful not to bank on unproven technology.

I think the best option is probably increasing the amount of generation 3 reactors, or even generation 2 reactors like the Canadian CANDU reactors where there is already an existing knowledge base of engineers and technicians that can rapidly scale up production to meet demand so that it can be relatively cost effective per kilowatt.

Agree, it’s almost never discussed by any major party politicians. Andrew Yang would be the exception.

 

[2021Doctor]

The Medicare pay rate for anesthesiologists is a mere fraction of the current insurance pay rate. Based on the 2018 American Society of Anesthesiologists report, the national average insured conversion factor for anesthesia (the amount paid for a 15-minute time period of service) was $76.32. The current national Medicare conversion factor for anesthesia is $22.18, or only 29% of the 2018 overall mean commercial conversion factor.

Posted August 19, 2020 at 5:30am
Democrats won control of the House in 2018 by pounding the issue of health care, and there is no sign they plan to change course this year as they try to build that majority and capture the Senate and White House.
The party adopted a platform Tuesday at the Democratic National Convention that lays out presidential nominee Joe Biden’s plan to allow people to enroll in government-run Medicare coverage at 60 years old, down from 65, while younger people could buy that coverage through a “Medicare-like public option.”

Even with one-party rule, Biden health care plan is no slam dunk - Roll Call
Democrat platform calls for Medicare eligibility at age 60 and "public option" so younger people could buy government-run coverage.

www.rollcall.com

Almost 23 million new Medicare patients are on the way.

 

[pgg]

To be fair it’s not like anyone on either side is really beating down the door nowadays to ramp up nuclear

View attachment 316690

I blame the anti-science Republican hippies just as much as the pro-science Democrat hippies on this one. Hippies gonna hippie.

 

[Goro]

In regard to alternative energy solutions, lemme quote myself from another thread a couple months ago when we were talking about private vs public sector.

"As for the private sector....you remember that company Solyndra that was suuuuchhh a big scandal for Obama? It was part of a DoE loan program to encourage risky corporate innovation in alternative energy and energy efficiency. I’m sure everyone thinks the program was a failure, but it actually turned a profit on its loans. There are 35 viable, utility-scale, now privately funded solar companies in existence when before the program there were 0. Every Tesla on the road is there because their Fremont factory was able to get funded by the govt when the private sector turned up their noses. The program ended up funding a company that has a market cap bigger than Ford at its peak, but yet the program has been sitting frozen since Trump has been in office."

As an aside, renewable energy now outnumbers coal as a source of electricity in the United States.

It is literally more expensive to dig coal out of the ground and it is to generate wind or solar power.

I would provide a citation, but unfortunately I'm now out with the daughter getting pancakes

 

[pgg]

So, I’m in agreement that nuclear power is probably the best option. But just to play devil’s advocate, thorium hasn’t really ever been actually used, right? The Molten-Salt reactor at Oak Ridge National Lab didn’t actually use thorium unless I’m mistaken.

The ITER fusion project in France has been consuming attention and electricity for years, without any indication that it will successfully produce more electricity than it consumes. One has to be careful not to bank on unproven technology.

I think the best option is probably increasing the amount of generation 3 reactors, or even generation 2 reactors like the Canadian CANDU reactors where there is already an existing knowledge base of engineers and technicians that can rapidly scale up production to meet demand so that it can be relatively cost effective per kilowatt.

Yes to all of the above - however, although there aren't any production thorium cycle reactors, unlike fusion, there aren't any real engineering hurdles to it. I'd certainly settle for some new gen 2 or 3 reactors but I'd rather see $ thrown at thorium than fusion, if I had to pick one or the other.

ITER is an enormous reactor and it looks like the bigger tokamaks get, the more efficient they are, and the more likely they are to be net energy out. I shudder to think how enormous and expensive and non-scalable that answer would be if it ever actually generates anything besides heat using energy from the French fission reactor down the road. We're learning from it, but I wonder if it's a dead-end design. We're not going to power the planet with ten of those things and there probably isn't enough money on the planet to build eleven.

Bottom line, I just don't think there's the same likelihood of getting fusion to work just by throwing money and scientists at it.

 

[BLADEMDA]

Biden wants to lower the eligibility age for Medicare to 60 from 65, with optional enrollment in that 5-year period. The funding for this change would come from general revenue.

The cost is an estimated $200 billion over a decade, said Marc Goldwein, senior vice president of policy at the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. However, he said, the price tag could be much lower.

“My gut is that’s a high-end estimate,” Goldwein said. “Health-care coverage is pretty high already in that age group.”

He also pointed out that Biden wants to create a public health insurance option and expand access to coverage through the health-care exchanges. Those options could end up being better for those folks than Medicare, he said.

Separately, Biden wants Medicare to cover dental, vision and hearing, all of which are currently excluded. For that, beneficiaries can sign up for a Medicare Advantage Plan, which may provide some coverage.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/08/22/why-medicare-coverage-could-expand-under-a-biden-presidency.html

 

[vector2]

Ahhh, finally Mark Meadows decides to be the 4th Chief of Staff to make himself an utter laughingstock







And calling the modern-day GOP a death cult is no longer just speaking metaphorically

 

[Matty44]

“I know Joe Biden. I’ve always liked Joe Biden. But this is ****ing bull****. This is a lie. And he knows it. To actually say that “Donald Trump said the white supremacists were very fine people” is to tell the world “Don’t ever again believe anything I say. I’m not to be taken seriously.”

-Anonymous

 

[vector2]

“We have a wonderful OPPORTUNITY here folks, that may never come again,” wrote Rocky J. Suhayda, the head of the American Nazi Party, last fall. “Donald Trump’s campaign statements, if nothing else, have SHOWN that ‘our views’ are NOT so ‘unpopular’ as the Political Correctness crowd have told everyone they are!”
-----
During the Republican National Convention in July, Trump endorser Andrew Anglin, who runs a neo-Nazi website called the Daily Stormer, wrote: “The biggest story in the filthy k**e media has been a few lines from Melania’s speech which these Jews claim she stole from monkey Michelle.”
-----
Trump told the four women of color that they should "go back" to the "crime infested places" they came from, even though three of the four were born in the US and the fourth is a naturalized citizen. "Man, President Trump's Twitter account has been pure fire lately. This might be the funniest thing he's ever tweeted. This is the kind of WHITE NATIONALISM we elected him for," wrote Andrew Anglin on his Daily Stormer site -- one of the most highly trafficked neo-Nazi websites.
-----
And President Trump boasted in the Oval Office that he raised more money for [disgraced, racist Congressman] Mr. King than for anyone else.
-----
Calling someone a white supremacist is a very strong and personal attack, but McHugh does not hesitate to denounce Miller from what she knows of him and how she saw in him a kindred spirit when she was on a racist path.

"I would absolutely call him [WH advisor Stephen] Miller a white supremacist," she says. His driving ideology is "white supremacy and anti-immigration especially," she adds. McHugh herself once followed the same hate as Miller. When she first moved to Washington, she dated a white nationalist and they and their friends would hang out in a home they dubbed "the house of hate."
-----
David Duke, one of the US’s most notorious racist extremists, has reiterated his support for Donald Trump’s re-election campaign and suggested the president replace his current vice president, Mike Pence, with Fox News host Tucker Carlson.

 

[Matty44]

Hey Vec, let’s see if you can be honest for a sec about Trump or not. Do you believe he said the white supremacists in Charlottesville we’re fine people? Just a simple yes or no is good.

 

[vector2]

More recently, he used the vast reach of his social media platforms to retweet a video to his millions of followers in which a man at a retirement community riding in a golf cart bearing “Trump 2020” and “American First” signs yells the racist phrase “white power!” at a group of counter protesters. Michael D. Shear writing in the Washington Post states that while Trump later deleted the video, “he did not condemn the ‘white power’ statement or specifically disavow the sentiment expressed by his supporters.”

 

[vector2]

Portland Protests Turn Peaceful

Protests in Portland turned largely peaceful after federal agents withdrew, and organizers called on demonstrators to vote in November

www.wsj.com

Whatever happened to all the pearl clutchers crying about anarchy and violence? It's almost as if the trump administration escalating tensions, renditioning people from the street, and blatantly disregarding federalism and the wishes of mayors, governors, congressmen, and senators was what was making things worse....

 

[Matty44]

Yeah, didn’t think you’d be able to answer.

Color me shocked.

 

[nimbus]

Hey Vec, let’s see if you can be honest for a sec about Trump or not. Do you believe he said the white supremacists in Charlottesville we’re fine people? Just a simple yes or no is good.

“The Unite the Right rally[4] was a white supremacist and neo-Nazi[5][6][7][8] rally that took place in Charlottesville, Virginia, from August 11 to 12, 2017.[9][10] Protesters were members of the far-right and included self-identified members of the alt-right,[11] neo-Confederates,[12] neo-fascists,[13] white nationalists,[14] neo-Nazis,[15] Klansmen,[16] and various right-wing militias.[17] The marchers chanted racist and antisemitic slogans and carried weapons, Nazi and neo-Nazi symbols, the Valknut, Confederate battle flags, Deus Vult crosses, flags, and other symbols of various past and present anti-Muslim and antisemitic groups.[8][9][18][19][20][21][22] The organizers' stated goals included unifying the American white nationalist movement[11] and opposing the proposed removal of the statue of General Robert E. Lee from Charlottesville's former Lee Park.[21][23]“



Yes. Aside from the counter protestors, who else was there? And it’s were, not we’re. One of Trump’s longest serving advisors, Stephen Miller, is a white nationalist as is Steve Bannon, his former chief strategist.

 

[Matty44]

“The Unite the Right rally[4] was a white supremacist and neo-Nazi[5][6][7][8] rally that took place in Charlottesville, Virginia, from August 11 to 12, 2017.[9][10] Protesters were members of the far-right and included self-identified members of the alt-right,[11] neo-Confederates,[12] neo-fascists,[13] white nationalists,[14] neo-Nazis,[15] Klansmen,[16] and various right-wing militias.[17] The marchers chanted racist and antisemitic slogans and carried weapons, Nazi and neo-Nazi symbols, the Valknut, Confederate battle flags, Deus Vult crosses, flags, and other symbols of various past and present anti-Muslim and antisemitic groups.[8][9][18][19][20][21][22] The organizers' stated goals included unifying the American white nationalist movement[11] and opposing the proposed removal of the statue of General Robert E. Lee from Charlottesville's former Lee Park.[21][23]“



Yes. Aside from the counter protestors, who else was there? And it’s were, not we’re. One of Trump’s longest serving advisors is Stephen Miller, a white nationalist.

First off, thanks for being the autocorrect police. Brownie point for you.

Secondly, and I’m sorry, cause I don’t wanna resort to name calling like is Vec is so prone to do, but if you read the full transcript of that press conference and you still think Trump was calling white supremacists “fine people”, you’re either 100% disingenuous or a F***ing idiot. There’s really no other option there. It’s plain as day, but unfortunately, most on the left are like vampires to garlic when asked to admit not everything Trump says is horrible and racist.


REPORTER: The neo-Nazis started this thing. They showed up in Charlottesville.

TRUMP: Excuse me, they didn't put themselves down as neo-Nazis, and you had some very bad people in that group. But you also had people that were very fine people on both sides. You had people in that group – excuse me, excuse me. I saw the same pictures as you did. You had people in that group that were there to protest the taking down, of to them, a very, very important statue and the renaming of a park from Robert E. Lee to another name.

REPORTER: George Washington and Robert E. Lee are not the same.

TRUMP: Oh no, George Washington was a slave owner. Was George Washington a slave owner? So will George Washington now lose his status? Are we going to take down – excuse me. Are we going to take down, are we going to take down statues to George Washington? How about Thomas Jefferson? What do you think of Thomas Jefferson? You like him? Okay, good. Are we going to take down his statue? He was a major slave owner. Are we going to take down his statue? You know what? It’s fine, you’re changing history, you’re changing culture, and you had people – and I'm not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists, because they should be condemned totally – but you had many people in that group other than neo-Nazis and white nationalists, okay? And the press has treated them absolutely unfairly. Now, in the other group also, you had some fine people, but you also had troublemakers and you see them come with the black outfits and with the helmets and with the baseball bats – you had a lot of bad people in the other group too.

I get you hate Trump, but have some intellectual integrity about it at least. I can, and have criticized Trump about plenty, but it seems impossible for people like you to ever give him one ounce of credit for anything.

 

[Matty44]

Hey, in that vein, challenge number 2....

Name one good thing Trump has done as president.

 

[nimbus]

I can, and have criticized Trump about plenty, but it seems impossible for people like you to ever give him one ounce of credit for anything.

You have? Where?

 

[nimbus]

Hey, in that vein, challenge number 2....

Name one good thing Trump has done as president.

Gorsuch was a good appointee. He’s conservative, smart, qualified, and still honors the letter of the law.

 

[Matty44]

You have? Where?

Feel free to scan my posts if you like.

 

[Matty44]

Gorsuch was a good appointee.

Congrats. I’ll hold my breath for Vector who still hasn’t answered my first question. But to be honest, if you hold to your belief about the Charlottesville stuff, I can’t take anything you say with any sense of seriousness or being genuine.

 

[vector2]

"name one good thing Trump has done as president."





Made this chyron a thing that actually happened in real life.

Hell, I'll give you two

 

[Matty44]

You ever gonna give the Charlottesville question a shot Vec? Did you ever read the transcript or watch more than a 10 seconds of sound bite?

 

[teacher2md]

I know I shouldn't engage this conversation but it's depressing to see graduate-level trained physicians unable to grasp the enormity of the scientific evidence behind climate change. If we can't be trusted to be scientifically literate, then there is no hope for the rest of the country. There is no question that fossil fuels are driving massive increases in atmospheric and oceanic CO2, and that even under optimistic circumstances this will be a huge source of economic strain over the next 20-100 years.

I can't believe the Heartland Institute is referenced on this forum without irony. It is on all of us to understand the science. A good starting point is skepticalscience.com . The 97% consensus is as real as it gets.

Consider this-- if you were diagnosed with cancer that required an extensive treatment, you would get a second opinion, maybe even a third opinion. But what if you went to 100 oncologists, and 97 of them recommended invasive treatment. Would you go with the recommendations of the 3 who said you don't need any intervention?

Regarding the costs of 'green' energy: solar is now cheaper per kWh than coal or gas. China has invested massively to become independent from fossil fuels, and is the leading the US in %renewable energy.

 

[vector2]

The cognitive dissonance of people who just can’t accept that trump is a xenophobic, bigoted racist is downright impressive sometimes. I think even @BLADEMDA knows trump is a bigot but is just making calculated devil’s bargain and will vote for him based on economics.

For those suffering from the dissonance, it simply doesn’t matter that people have written epic 50 yr histories of every instance of his racism. Doesn’t matter that trump invented the racist phenomenon of Obama birtherism. Doesn’t matter that he just perpetuated birtherism against Harris. Doesn’t matter that he endorsed Steve King. Doesn’t matter that white supremacist Stephen Miller is still working in the WH. Doesn’t matter that he said Judge Curiel couldn’t do his job because he was of Mexican heritage. Doesn’t matter that he called African countries ****holes. Doesn’t matter that he prefers immigrants who look like Norwegians. Doesn’t matter that he tells US citizen congresswomen of color to go back to where they came from. Doesn’t matter that he’s willing to hold up the military budget so that bases can keep the names of racist traitors. Doesn’t matter that he proudly calls COVID-19 “Kung Flu.” Doesn’t matter that the KKK and literally every single other white supremacist or neo-nazi organization fervently endorses him.

Their minds are so feeble and fragile that they latch onto a drop a plausible deniability even when there is an ocean of abject evidence washing over them. Sad, really.

 

[vector2]

I know I shouldn't engage this conversation but it's depressing to see graduate-level trained physicians unable to grasp the enormity of the scientific evidence behind climate change. If we can't be trusted to be scientifically literate, then there is no hope for the rest of the country. There is no question that fossil fuels are driving massive increases in atmospheric and oceanic CO2, and that even under optimistic circumstances this will be a huge source of economic strain over the next 20-100 years.

I can't believe the Heartland Institute is referenced on this forum without irony. It is on all of us to understand the science. A good starting point is skepticalscience.com . The 97% consensus is as real as it gets.

Consider this-- if you were diagnosed with cancer that required an extensive treatment, you would get a second opinion, maybe even a third opinion. But what if you went to 100 oncologists, and 97 of them recommended invasive treatment. Would you go with the recommendations of the 3 who said you don't need any intervention?

Regarding the costs of 'green' energy: solar is now cheaper per kWh than coal or gas. China has invested massively to become independent from fossil fuels, and is the leading the US in %renewable energy.

Physicians frequently are some of the dumbest people when it comes to economics, finance, math, and honestly a whole bunch of basic science too. We are excellent at memorizing a bunch of material and regurgitating it. That is not the same as having a deep understanding of the scientific method and a deep understanding of statistics. What compounds this problem is that we Dunning-Kruger ourselves into thinking that because we took organic chemistry a thousand years ago and because we have the most basic understanding of vapor physics that we’re somehow qualified to rigorously evaluate the evidence behind climate change. I will be the first to tell you that I do not have the physics, chemistry, or meteorological background to evaluate the primary literature on climate change, and odds are neither is anyone else on this forum. So really the only options left are to go back to school for 10 yrs so you can become a climate change expert, or trust the expert consensus. It would make sense to have some skepticism if the consensus was weak (give everyone 30 cc/kg IVF bolus for every presumed sepsis, regardless of clinical picture), but in reality the consensus on climate change is overwhelmingly, exceptionally strong (give antibiotics for a culture proven bacterial infection)

 

[BLADEMDA]

The cognitive dissonance of people who just can’t accept that trump is a xenophobic, bigoted racist is downright impressive sometimes. I think even @BLADEMDA knows trump is a bigot but is just making calculated devil’s bargain and will vote for him based on economics.

For those suffering from the dissonance, it simply doesn’t matter that people have written epic 50 yr histories of every instance of his racism. Doesn’t matter that trump invented the racist phenomenon of Obama birtherism. Doesn’t matter that he just perpetuated birtherism against Harris. Doesn’t matter that he endorsed Steve King. Doesn’t matter that white supremacist Stephen Miller is still working in the WH. Doesn’t matter that he said Judge Curiel couldn’t do his job because he was of Mexican heritage. Doesn’t matter that he called African countries ****holes. Doesn’t matter that he prefers immigrants who look like Norwegians. Doesn’t matter that he tells US citizen congresswomen of color to go back to where they came from. Doesn’t matter that he’s willing to hold up the military budget so that bases can keep the names of racist traitors. Doesn’t matter that he proudly calls COVID-19 “Kung Flu.” Doesn’t matter that the KKK and literally every single other white supremacist or neo-nazi organization fervently endorses him.

Their minds are so feeble and fragile that they latch onto a drop a plausible deniability even when there is an ocean of abject evidence washing over them. Sad, really.

So, it’s safe to assume you won’t be voting for Donald Trump this November.

 

[BLADEMDA]

Physicians frequently are some of the dumbest people when it comes to economics, finance, math, and honestly a whole bunch of basic science too. We are excellent at memorizing a bunch of material and regurgitating it. That is not the same as having a deep understanding of the scientific method and a deep understanding of statistics. What compounds this problem is that we Dunning-Kruger ourselves into thinking that because we took organic chemistry a thousand years ago and because we have the most basic understanding of vapor physics that we’re somehow qualified to rigorously evaluate the evidence behind climate change. I will be the first to tell you that I do not have the physics, chemistry, or meteorological background to evaluate the primary literature on climate change, and odds are neither is anyone else on this forum. So really the only options left are to go back to school for 10 yrs so you can become a climate change expert, or trust the expert consensus. It would make sense to have some skepticism if the consensus were weak (give everyone 30 cc/kg IVF bolus for every presumed sepsis, regardless of clinical picture), but in reality the consensus on climate change is more akin to the recommendation to give antiobiotics for a bacterial infection.

I think climate change is real and likely to surpass the 2 degree increase over the next 20-25 years. I also think the 2 trillion dollars of spending won’t impact that temperature change one iota. I’m all for common sense environmental policies which are both effective and environmentally sound. Let’s do those things which will help keep our water and our air as clean as possible. We should also spend money to promote green energy projects and solutions. But, let’s keep our economy intact and not hurt the middle class with high carbon taxes.

Green energy will over time replace many carbon based energy facilities. Most people will choose the cleaner and less harmful energy solution if all things are equal. With time technology will win out and carbon based fuels simply won’t be needed for some or even Most of energy needs. Until then we should resist the urge to destroy our economy and bankrupt our country by instituting a green new deal we can neither afford nor want to replace current technology. Again, I’m all for government support of green projects and even agree with Vector 2 on spending 1 percent of GDP each year on such objectives.

 

[nimbus]

Elon Musk received $5billion in loans, grants, and subsidies while simultaneously whining about taxes and regulation. And his rich customers got tax breaks to buy Teslas. Hopefully the Green New Deal will stimulate the creation of 100 more companies like Tesla.

 

[chocomorsel]

You ever gonna give the Charlottesville question a shot Vec? Did you ever read the transcript or watch more than a 10 seconds of sound bite?

I just want to know what kind of “fine people” march along White Nationalists and Neo Nazis.
Honest question. Because if you didn’t want statues torn down simply because you are from they South but not racist, you could have marched independently of the Nazis.
Why mix yourself with them if what they stand for turns your stomach?

Is there not enough room for multiple different protests?

 

[chocomorsel]

Oh — definitely life/opportunities arent completely fair in 2020, I agree. It sucks to be poor.

It’s fine for the government to have some policies to support the poor of all races, all over; it becomes problematic to say there are no opportunities because people are a certain skin tone though.

No one is saying there are NO opportunities. See, that’s called being extreme.

What people are trying to say is that the opportunities are not equal for the Black kid that’s growing up in the South Side of Chicago versus the White kid that’s growing up in say Orange County CA.

One is starting way ahead in life and by simple virtue of his Caucasian skin tone, he will be given opportunities that the Black kid may never see. The black kid will likely have to work a hell of a lot harder to prove that he deserves those same opportunities than the White kid and he may still not get the opportunity at all while the White kid walks in and is handed the job or opportunity simply because he’s given benefit of the doubt.
Black kids tend to be held back in school where White kids tend to be pushed forward. When I came to this country they tried to hold me back in sixth grade because my birthday is after September even though I had completed sixth grade in my home country and was halfway into Seventh. My friend was recently being told a story by her European friend while I was on the phone with her about his kid coming here at around the same age as me. I immediately thought the ending would be the same since Americans scrutinize other education systems quite a bit and I thought he was gonna tell her they tried to push his kid back. Lo and behold, it was the opposite. She was immediately being pushed a grade ahead even though she hadn’t done that grade in her home country. My best friend of course laughed about it afterwards.

One kid is starting life on at least second base while the other is swinging the bat at home plate.

The opportunities may be there, but making it to the same goal takes a hell of a lot more work and struggle for the black kid growing up poor than the White kid growing up upper middle class.

Let’s face it, poverty in this country disproportionately affects black and brown people a lot more than Caucasians.

Systemic racism is alive and well.

Black folks didn’t end up where they were simply because they were black. It took over 300 years of continued mistreatment to get where they are today and now people expect them to overcome all these hurdles created for them in less than a millennium.

 

[nimbus]

A very fine person...

White nationalist spread hate, harassment from parents’ Brandon home

Daniel McMahon, 31, spewed hate online, found common cause with a mass shooter and helped harass activists in North Carolina. Now he faces federal charges.

www.tampabay.com

Brandon white supremacist boasted he could spread hate the ‘legal way.’ He just pleaded guilty.

Daniel McMahon told a federal court he had cyberstalked a Florida activist for her views and threatened a Virginia city council candidate because of his race.

www.tampabay.com

 

[vector2]

I also think the 2 trillion dollars of spending won’t impact that temperature change one iota. .

This is my point exactly. Neither you nor I know exactly which types of scientific innovation are going to lead to the best improvement in the climate change trajectory. We do know though that public-private partnerships, similar to how NIH money contributes to the US pharma having the best drug development in the world, are the most effective at green technology development because private corporations are not going to undertake exorbitantly expensive but environmentally friendly projects out of the kindness of their hearts.

This is why I posted earlier that an Obama era DoE funded loan program led to the development of what are now over 30 profitable solar companies not to mention every Tesla on the road exists because of that program. Furthermore the program turned a profit for uncle sam. But thanks to GOP propaganda, what does the average person remember about the program? "Solyndra."

No matter which way you slice it, changing the trajectory of climate change is going to require some big time upfront spending, and the longer we wait the more expensive (as a % of GDP) correcting the issue becomes.

 

[teacher2md]

I think climate change is real and likely to surpass the 2 degree increase over the next 20-25 years. I also think the 2 trillion dollars of spending won’t impact that temperature change one iota. I’m all for common sense environmental policies which are both effective and environmentally sound. Let’s do those things which will help keep our water and our air as clean as possible. We should also spend money to promote green energy projects and solutions. But, let’s keep our economy intact and not hurt the middle class with high carbon taxes.

Frankly, I don't believe anyone who says that they agree with the science behind climate change but that the costs to do anything are too high.

If you actually understand what models are forecasting for the next 50 years, 2-4 trillion will be a small fraction of the economic costs of inaction. Think about this: When civil war in Syria displaced ~5 million people look how much political and economic turmoil was unleashed on the rest of the middle east and Europe. What happens when 10's of millions of people are displaced in Central and South America due to failing crops and desertification? If you think we have a problem with immigration now-- just wait. What about when water sources in Africa and middle east are eliminated? "Whiskey is for drinking, water is for fighting"...

The concern about climate change isn't about preserving the natural world. These issues will be major national defense and economic disasters if they are not addressed now. Either pay the 2-4 trillion dollar price now or we and our children will be paying many multiples of that.

 

[teacher2md]

Since the issue of unreliable weather stations was brought up and it's a favorite of climate-denialists, I'll address that specifically.

Anthony Watts runs a climate-denial website where he popularized the theory that weather temperature recording stations have been put mostly in parking lots, etc. The scientific community took his concerns seriously, and did extensive evaluations to compare the results from the suspect weather stations to others. He was even invited to be a co-author on the summary paper. The results: there wasn't an overstatement of temperature changes, and if anything these 'questionable' sites underestimated the average temperature change.

Anthony Watts continues to be a major 'scientist' for the Heartland Institute, even though his training is as a TV meteorologist and he has only a high school degree.

 

[thinkorswim]

The GOP has decided that they have no agenda for a second-term other than blindly following Trump and opposing literally everything Obama did and the Democrats are proposing. That's really just sad and pathetic when you think about everything going on right now.

Republicans will not adopt a new platform at this week's convention and will instead pledge to 'enthusiastically' support Trump

Some likened the party to a personality cult around President Donald Trump, but the GOP says it just didn't have the capacity to form a new platform.

www.businessinsider.com

It's also a bold move coming from a party that really hasn't done much at all for the economy since taking over.

Trump says he built a great economy. Numbers tell a different story.

The average quarterly economic growth under Trump, 2.5 percent, was almost exactly what it was under Obama in the second term, 2.4 percent.

www.nbcnews.com

 

[dannyboy1]

I know I shouldn't engage this conversation but it's depressing to see graduate-level trained physicians unable to grasp the enormity of the scientific evidence behind climate change. If we can't be trusted to be scientifically literate, then there is no hope for the rest of the country. There is no question that fossil fuels are driving massive increases in atmospheric and oceanic CO2, and that even under optimistic circumstances this will be a huge source of economic strain over the next 20-100 years.

Because it will likely be 100 years (or more) to see the actual effects. When have human beings ever given a damn about something beyond their own lifespans?
We just went through coronavirus and people were downplaying it until it was on their doorsteps. No doubt climate change will be the same...

 

[BLADEMDA]

Frankly, I don't believe anyone who says that they agree with the science behind climate change but that the costs to do anything are too high.

If you actually understand what models are forecasting for the next 50 years, 2-4 trillion will be a small fraction of the economic costs of inaction. Think about this: When civil war in Syria displaced ~5 million people look how much political and economic turmoil was unleashed on the rest of the middle east and Europe. What happens when 10's of millions of people are displaced in Central and South America due to failing crops and desertification? If you think we have a problem with immigration now-- just wait. What about when water sources in Africa and middle east are eliminated? "Whiskey is for drinking, water is for fighting"...

The concern about climate change isn't about preserving the natural world. These issues will be major national defense and economic disasters if they are not addressed now. Either pay the 2-4 trillion dollar price now or we and our children will be paying many multiples of that.

I don't trust anyone that thinks we, as a nation, should foot the bill for the entire world on climate change. The evidence is just as clear that 2-4 trillion over 4 years in the USA won't alter the course of warming in the world. This will take every nation, especially China, to curb CO2 emissions and join Europe in actually caring about climate change.

I fully support 150-200 billion per year of our money devoted to helping make the world a better place. I also support the expansion of Medicaid for the all the poor in this country. There are many reasonable Republicans out there who actually give a damn about other things than just profit.

I do NOT agree the world is coming to an end in the next 12 years. I hope members of my party in Congress will support reasonable legislation and regulations to help develop green technologies. I can not and will not agree to 2 trillion over 4 years no matter what scare tactics the left claims will occur if we don't bankrupt our nation to alter climate by 0.5 degrees.

How Does 'Boss' AOC Plan To Pay For Her $93 Trillion Green New Deal?

Since Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has declared herself the "boss" of the "Green New Deal," maybe she can explain were the money will come from to pay its $93 trillion cost. Because taxing the rich won't even scratch the surface.

www.investors.com

 

[BLADEMDA]

How much would just this “bare bones” version of the Green New Deal cost? By 2040, we can expect:

• A peak reduction of more than 1.4 million jobs
• More than $40,000 in lost income for a typical family of four
• An average 12-14 percent increase in household electricity costs
• An aggregate loss of over $3.9 trillion in gross domestic product (GDP)

Unquestionably, these projections significantly underestimate the costs of the Green New Deal’s energy components. The same FAQ sheet argues that massive amounts of spending are necessary, and “government is best placed to be the prime driver.”

In other words, the deal’s advocates expect taxpayers to foot the bill for a massive, economy-wide transition. Researchers have estimated it would take more than $5 trillion just to switch from coal, nuclear and natural gas to 100 percent renewables.

Proponents of the Green New Deal argue that the costs of inaction are dramatically higher. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., claims, “We’re going to pay for this whether we pass a Green New Deal or not. Because as towns and cities go underwater, as wildfires ravage our communities, we are going to pay.”

It’s an unlikely doomsday scenario, and it can’t be found anywhere in the latest report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. In fact, the report finds no trends in floods, hurricanes, tornadoes or droughts – nor does it attribute extreme weather to anthropogenic emissions.

And even if it did, the Green New Deal would not actually provide any “climate insurance” because it would do absolutely nothing to abate temperature increases or slow the rise of sea levels.

In fact, the U.S. could cut its carbon dioxide emissions by 100 percent, and it would not make a discernible difference in global warming. Complete elimination of U.S. emission would inhibit warming by less than 0.2 degrees by the end of this century. It would reduce the rise of sea levels by less than 2 centimeters.

That doesn’t mean we should do nothing. Regardless of the cause of extreme weather events, preparing for natural disasters and adapting to land and water changes over time is common sense.

The Green New Deal Would Cost Trillions and Make Not a Dime’s Worth of Difference

Remember those office supply ads with the “that was easy” button? The premise was, just hit the magical red button and all of your supply needs are taken care of: It’s just that easy! The Green New Deal, which earlier this week garnered exactly zero votes of support, was an “easy” button for...

www.heritage.org

 

[teacher2md]

This will take every nation, especially China, to curb CO2 emissions and join Europe in actually caring about climate change.

No one is asking the US to foot the entire bill. We merely need to do our part with the rest of the civilized world to join Europe, China, and India in reducing carbon output. As I referenced above, China has already committed to moving toward renewable energy. They continue to invest massively in green energy and are beating the US in %renewable energy (30% vs. 18%). The same story is true in India (21%). And it's not because China and India have altrustic intentions-- it is mere economics that it is getting cheaper to build and run a solar powered plant than it is to continue to run a coal/gas powered electrical plant.

What we do need is for the US to grow up and act like an adult on the world stage, rejoin the Paris accords, and invest in noncarbon energy production. The green new deal isnt perfect, and is loaded with "environmental justice" nonsense, but the alternative proposed by the republican party is to double down on fossil fuel with government subsidies (bring back coal? are you serious?) while blaming the rest of the world.

I do NOT agree the world is coming to an end in the next 12 years.

I don't agree with that either. But it is true that we should worried about massive economic contraction in the next 20-40 years due to geopolitical effects of climate change if we continue to emit at this pace. There's no way we're going to be below the 1.5 C goal-- that's already a foregone conclusion. The best we can hope is to mitigate some of the worst effects by staying below 2C.

 

[dhb]

You just want a 1k+ reply thread