Why is everything a crisis to leftists?

submitted by Adventurous_Ad6212 from self.AskSaidIt

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Alienhunter 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

It's not going to be great for natural ecosystems either. Climate change won't be abated on the thousands of years timeframe.

Geologically short timescales. I'm not claiming the effects are at all good or desirable. But it's far different from the "earth becomes the new Venus" crap you'll see a lot of stupid people push.

No. Just move to other, generally cheaper, and certainly more price-stable sources of energy. As a bonus you can choose ones not controlled by Saudi Arabia and Russia.

Yes agreed. This is the smart approach. We'd not have anywhere near the issue we have today if we had phased out coal and oil for nuclear power by now. Of course the radical environmentalist types greatly opposed that.

Sheesh! And the OP reckons the leftist say everything's a crisis!

Extreme policies create crisis. Very few people actually favor these solutions, fewer still are able to be implemented. But we have to shut down bad ideas regardless of whose side they are coming from less they simply be allowed to become policy and then we deal with the aftermath of those plus the original problem not being solved.

There's so much money tied around in green industry now that a lot of the policies proposed do little to help the environment besides funnel money around to politicians friends who benefit from the new business environment. Not at all limited to climate science, consider the companies that made a killing off of selling those backscatter x-ray machines to every airport post 9/11 despite them being of marginal usefulness, and consider how they were lobbying congress hard to mandate them at a time of "crisis".

Consider the same with COVID jabs. Forget those conspiracy theories where they say it's all population control, why the fuck would they want to kill off their customers? But are they benefiting from a government that mandates people use their product and does that open up the serious possibility of abuse? Absolutely.

How come states like California can get away with banning plastic drinking straws (something which was almost zero impact on global warming) and funneling billions of dollars in solar and wind and failed mass transit projects to help the environment all the while getting all their power from coal pumping in their water from the rivers and leaving them dry as a bone when they've got this massive fucking thing called the goddamn ocean they could be getting water from and this fun stuff called uranium that grants almost limitless very clean energy by comparison.

Oh right it's California and they can't build infrastructure for shit because they are all idiots who would rather give credit cards to homeless people rather than build high occupancy housing units to bring down the astronomical costs of rent that are keeping people homeless.

[–]ActuallyNot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Geologically short timescales.

Human civilization long timescales.

But we have to shut down bad ideas regardless of whose side they are coming from less they simply be allowed to become policy and then we deal with the aftermath of those plus the original problem not being solved.

Civilization is not going to collapse from a price on carbon emissions.

There's so much money tied around in green industry now that a lot of the policies proposed do little to help the environment besides funnel money around to politicians friends who benefit from the new business environment.

WTF?

Sunshine and wind aren't property of someone. I get that the fossil fuel industry has to accuse the renewable energy of what they're guilty of in order to create the perspective that everyone is equally evil, but think about the economics of it for a bit.

China makes a lot of PV cells and a lot of wind turbines, but they don't have a monopoly. There's pretty much free market forces in the renewables industry. No one is making a killing. It there were, someone would just undercut them.

[–]Alienhunter 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

There's big money in construction and someone has to build the turbines, after someone has to transport the materials from the factory that makes the materials from other materials that have to be mined out of the earth. We can strip mine for all the silicon and rare earth minerals needed for solar panels, but at the end of the day are we causing a net positive for the environment forcing a switch over to a power supply that won't work so well when it's cloudy and will require expensive battery technology to practically use. Or should we just use nukes? Also expensive but works way better. And less total environmental impact. Only problem is hippies don't like it, but we can simply build wind turbines in front of their protests to glean more power from their incessant babblings.