EPTRomney's speech the other night dissecting the lies about 'fairness' was spot-on. I think he should win this, in spite of voter fraud and traditional media all going against him. Once every generation or so, American voters have to re-learn how destructive, wreckless, and naive unadulterated socialism is. President Obama has provided that opportunity for this generation. A golden opportunity to show the rising generation that conservatism (ie classic liberalism) is the path to greater happiness for all people.
President Obama Re-Elected - Page 61
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Hey guys! We'll be closing this thread shortly, but we will make an American politics megathread where we can continue the discussions in here. The new thread can be found here: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=383301 | ||
|
0neder
United States3733 Posts
Romney's speech the other night dissecting the lies about 'fairness' was spot-on. I think he should win this, in spite of voter fraud and traditional media all going against him. Once every generation or so, American voters have to re-learn how destructive, wreckless, and naive unadulterated socialism is. President Obama has provided that opportunity for this generation. A golden opportunity to show the rising generation that conservatism (ie classic liberalism) is the path to greater happiness for all people. | ||
|
sam!zdat
United States5559 Posts
On April 26 2012 10:33 Defacer wrote: If you're particularly apocalyptic, there's signs that peak oil has already passed, and that the best solution would be a comprehensive, long term energy plan that uses the world's remaining oil to create the infrastructure necessary to ween ourselves off it. Not to mention we are already past the point of catastrophic climate change, which means we will probably have to engage in large-scale carbon sequestration efforts in the future. If that's the case, it may not matter how much more greenhouse gases we put in to the system, and we should simply try to use the oil we have to transform our economy into a sustainable, steady-state system. Does anybody who knows about the science have anything to say about this? | ||
|
sam!zdat
United States5559 Posts
On April 26 2012 14:21 0neder wrote: Romney's speech the other night dissecting the lies about 'fairness' was spot-on. I think he should win this, in spite of voter fraud and traditional media all going against him. Once every generation or so, American voters have to re-learn how destructive, wreckless, and naive unadulterated socialism is. President Obama has provided that opportunity for this generation. A golden opportunity to show the rising generation that conservatism (ie classic liberalism) is the path to greater happiness for all people. Obama may have failed miserably to address the economic crisis, but it was not of his making. This is fundamentally a crisis OF neoliberalism. The operational paradigm of the Obama administration's "plan" (if you can call it that) was still a neoliberal paradigm - just with delusions of FDR. Liberalism is certainly not the answer. It is time for an entirely new structure. | ||
|
Smat
United States301 Posts
On April 26 2012 14:22 sam!zdat wrote: Not to mention we are already past the point of catastrophic climate change, which means we will probably have to engage in large-scale carbon sequestration efforts in the future. If that's the case, it may not matter how much more greenhouse gases we put in to the system, and we should simply try to use the oil we have to transform our economy into a sustainable, steady-state system. Does anybody who knows about the science have anything to say about this? Lol, seems to me that everything is running just as smoothly as it was before we entered "catastrophic" climate change. I think a lot of people need to except the fact that the average person isn't going to give a shit about climate change until it actually begins affecting them... He certainly isn't going to stand for artificially higher energy prices in attempts to force an oil-less economy when there is still plenty of oil available. | ||
|
sam!zdat
United States5559 Posts
On April 26 2012 14:42 Smat wrote: Lol, seems to me that everything is running just as smoothly as it was before we entered "catastrophic" climate change. I think a lot of people need to except the fact that the average person isn't going to give a shit about climate change until it actually begins affecting them... He certainly isn't going to stand for artificially higher energy prices in attempts to force an oil-less economy when there is still plenty of oil available. Yes, that's unfortunately the case. Nobody will notice until it is much too late - it is already too late. Consider the frog (frog?) that slowly gets boiled alive, or whatever that analogy is. I meant that we are past the point of no return, after which climate engineering projects will become necessary in the long term - it takes a while for the effects to happen. It is a very big system. To be fair, however, they would not be "artificially high" energy prices. In fact, oil prices are artificially low because they do not adequately account for externalities and long-term costs. (they would of course be "artificial" in the sense that our current market system, which is itself a product of artifice, would not produce them of its own accord) | ||
|
forgottendreams
United States1771 Posts
On April 26 2012 14:22 sam!zdat wrote: Not to mention we are already past the point of catastrophic climate change, which means we will probably have to engage in large-scale carbon sequestration efforts in the future. If that's the case, it may not matter how much more greenhouse gases we put in to the system, and we should simply try to use the oil we have to transform our economy into a sustainable, steady-state system. Does anybody who knows about the science have anything to say about this? As of right now that isn't true which is addressed in this thread somewhere (fuck knows which post I've forgotten but he did answer that question) http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=294083 These pages http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=global-warming-close-to-becoming-ir http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-not-urgent.htm Even if we fail the deadline at least we tried, and at least it sped up the process of becoming a more efficient humanity and slowed the glacial melting and ocean oxidification. We haven't even reached a tier 1 civilization yet on the Kardashev scale with how energy inefficient and politically discorded we are. So far a pathetic excuse for a creature in terms of survival, maybe machines will finish the job we can't  | ||
|
sam!zdat
United States5559 Posts
| ||
|
forgottendreams
United States1771 Posts
On April 26 2012 15:28 sam!zdat wrote: forgottendreams, thanks. I was under the impression that it was already substantially too late, but this is not an issue I've done a lot of research on. well me either until a random German scientist started to drop some serious knowledge bombs in relation to climate stuff O_o he really upped the ante in terms of both believer and skeptical discussion | ||
|
meatbox
Australia349 Posts
| ||
|
Defacer
Canada5052 Posts
On April 26 2012 14:42 Smat wrote: Not to mention we are already past the point of catastrophic climate change, which means we will probably have to engage in large-scale carbon sequestration efforts in the future. If that's the case, it may not matter how much more greenhouse gases we put in to the system, and we should simply try to use the oil we have to transform our economy into a sustainable, steady-state system. Does anybody who knows about the science have anything to say about this? It's sad, but I think the average person doesn't really realize how much the economy depends on oil. Every product, every piece of food, the clothes you wear, the computer you're messaging with, relies on oil to be manufactured and transported. People won't give a shit until the military declares martial law because people are rioting and storming supermarkets and paying $100 for a bag of rice. | ||
|
Triscuit
United States722 Posts
On April 26 2012 14:25 sam!zdat wrote: Obama may have failed miserably to address the economic crisis, but it was not of his making. This is fundamentally a crisis OF neoliberalism. The operational paradigm of the Obama administration's "plan" (if you can call it that) was still a neoliberal paradigm - just with delusions of FDR. Liberalism is certainly not the answer. It is time for an entirely new structure. Can you explain what you mean by neoliberalism? Reagan had neoliberal policies. FDR was more social liberal. Maybe I misunderstood. | ||
|
sam!zdat
United States5559 Posts
On April 26 2012 16:10 Triscuit wrote: Can you explain what you mean by neoliberalism? Reagan had neoliberal policies. FDR was more social liberal. Maybe I misunderstood. You would probably consider my economic beliefs pretty radical. Don't want to derail the thread by getting into it - would be happy to discuss elsewhere. My point is that I think that Obama administration and neoliberals both make the same fundamental mistakes so talking about the differences between them are futile. (edit: Neither of them accepts that capitalism as we know it is a fundamentally broken system, and reform is nothing but tightening the pressure cooker - to mix a metaphor :|) It's a little bit like the disdain that Marx and Engels have in the Communist Manifesto for what they call socialists (this is a very boring part of that book) | ||
|
Zoesan
Switzerland141 Posts
On April 26 2012 14:21 0neder wrote: @ Chytilova - the stimulus may have procrastinated us actually addressing the problem, but the hurt will have to come sooner or later. Romney's speech the other night dissecting the lies about 'fairness' was spot-on. I think he should win this, in spite of voter fraud and traditional media all going against him. Once every generation or so, American voters have to re-learn how destructive, wreckless, and naive unadulterated socialism is. President Obama has provided that opportunity for this generation. A golden opportunity to show the rising generation that conservatism (ie classic liberalism) is the path to greater happiness for all people. I'm just going to hope that this is a troll. This actually makes my brain hurt. | ||
|
sc2superfan101
3583 Posts
On April 26 2012 04:45 Zoesan wrote: Global warming is the consensus of the vast, vast, vast majority of scientists. So unless you believe in some weird conspiracy to god knows what ends by scientists from all over the world, different cultures, ethnicities and religions, well, then you better accept it. it doesn't have to be a conspiracy... | ||
|
GhostTK
United States26 Posts
| ||
|
Defacer
Canada5052 Posts
On April 26 2012 14:21 0neder wrote: @ Chytilova - the stimulus may have procrastinated us actually addressing the problem, but the hurt will have to come sooner or later. Romney's speech the other night dissecting the lies about 'fairness' was spot-on. I think he should win this, in spite of voter fraud and traditional media all going against him. Once every generation or so, American voters have to re-learn how destructive, wreckless, and naive unadulterated socialism is. President Obama has provided that opportunity for this generation. A golden opportunity to show the rising generation that conservatism (ie classic liberalism) is the path to greater happiness for all people. You guys have the shittiest healthcare system of any g20 country and the highest average tuition rates. Your idea of 'unadulterated socialism' is a farce. Canada must be full of geniuses, because if this is your idea of a socialist government then you guys suck at it. Voters have already seen what 'unadulterated' capitalism can do ... Make the wealthiest Americans richer while causing a catastrophic economic crisis. Surely there is an appropriate middle ground. | ||
|
kdgns
United States2427 Posts
On April 27 2012 03:00 Defacer wrote: You guys have the shittiest healthcare system of any g20 country and the highest average tuition rates. Your idea of 'unadulterated socialism' is a farce. Canada must be full of geniuses, because if this is your idea of a socialist government then you guys suck at it. Voters have already seen what 'unadulterated' capitalism can do ... Make the wealthiest Americans richer while causing a catastrophic economic crisis. Surely there is an appropriate middle ground. middle ground exists primarily in theory really, in a election of this sort, it is in the candidate's best interest to appeal to the more extreme because the people with extreme views are less likely to compromise and vote for someone they dont fully agree with than a moderate. The result is that each side will provide the most opposite and divisive platforms and its up to the moderates to vote for the lesser evil. So, no, there is no middle ground, not in an election year. | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On April 27 2012 03:00 Defacer wrote: You guys have the shittiest healthcare system of any g20 country and the highest average tuition rates. Your idea of 'unadulterated socialism' is a farce. Canada must be full of geniuses, because if this is your idea of a socialist government then you guys suck at it. Voters have already seen what 'unadulterated' capitalism can do ... Make the wealthiest Americans richer while causing a catastrophic economic crisis. Surely there is an appropriate middle ground. People with health insurance get immaculate care. | ||
|
Doublemint
Austria8513 Posts
On April 27 2012 03:30 xDaunt wrote: People with health insurance get immaculate care. For the cost per capita you better get immaculate care. | ||
|
Rimstalker
Germany734 Posts
On April 27 2012 03:30 xDaunt wrote: People with health insurance get immaculate care. you mean those that don't get shafted by their insurance corporation? | ||
| ||
