EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 1520
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets. Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
Liquid`Drone
Norway28600 Posts
On June 02 2019 03:58 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote: You cannot forget how large the US is and the population living in it. We're at roughly 350M people. We're going to produce more than Norway by a long shot. Which is why I'm citing per capita figures. If the US was only emitting 60% more than Norway while having 60 times the population, that would be an absolute miracle.  As for size, the US has twice the population density as Norway. Canada is indeed even more sparsely populated though which is certainly a factor (no idea whether it's sufficient to explain the discrepancy but oh well. ) | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
ZerOCoolSC2
8960 Posts
We're bad by every metric in almost every category. I don't even know how to describe a scenario where things get ostensibly better. | ||
|
Liquid`Drone
Norway28600 Posts
| ||
|
Ben...
Canada3485 Posts
On June 02 2019 06:07 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote: Unfortunately, other than the coasts, the political will to do actual change just doesn't seem as strong, especially in the older suburban white people demographic, and I find it incredibly frustrating. I'm from the Canadian prairies, which is basically Canada's version of the Midwest, and everything I've seen, we have a lot of parallels. Here, a lot of people don't want to or care about making personal changes to help deal with the issues of the environment. A massive number of people here drive large trucks and SUVs despite not actually needing them. I would hazard a guess that more than half of the trucks here have never seen a dirt road or hauled more than groceries. Unfortunately, these big vehicles are advertised as being "more luxurious", and they have become a status symbol among suburbanites as a result. These vehicles had started to go away somewhat when oil prices were really high but once the prices dropped ridiculously huge Tahoes and other vehicles started making a return. I only say that the size of the US is a factor to consider because the efforts that JimmiC mentioned by individual cities have some effect. The issue with the size and density, is that it will take an enormous effort to come anywhere close to efficient recycling programs on a national scale. If you had compared Norway to San Francisco or Austin or Portland, then sure. But the scales are hard to make sense of anything when it comes to the US. We're bad by every metric in almost every category. I don't even know how to describe a scenario where things get ostensibly better. People here are also completely unwilling to give up their vehicles. Mass transit has a negative stigma ("It's only used by poor people and university students") and any attempts at making cycling more viable with new bike lanes is met with people complaining about parking. Also because of this attitude, the suburbs here are basically only viable to live in if you drive. A lot of them have maybe one or two bus stops, and they're all designed so compactly that cycling in them is a death wish. Likewise with recycling. My family got in on the first recycling program in the city. It was government subsidized but privately run (you had to pay a small amount of money to take part), and it was amazing. We had 3 blue boxes: one for cardboard, one for glass/metal, and one for all plastic. It drastically cut down on the amount of stuff we were throwing out. We were basically only throwing out food scraps and styrofoam packaging. The program was so effective the city decided to roll it out to every household and just include it in taxes. Of course, almost instantly people started complaining that it was too much work and too complicated, and other people started chucking in actual garbage with their recycling. The city got exasperated and rolled out a simpler system with one giant bin you chuck everything in. People started even more so treating the recycling bins like an extra garbage bin, so the city had to restrict what could go in it further. Now it's at the point where the recycling program only accepts cardboard, clear plastic, and metal cans. That's it. No glass. No coloured plastic. No plastic bags. No milk jugs. No metal other than cans. They now say to throw all of that out or haul it to a recycling center yourself. You can take a pretty good guess what most people do. Contrast that recycling program with the one found in Nova Scotia (an east coast Canadian province that's right near Maine). We vacationed there a couple years back at a family member's house. Their recycling program was quite impressive. They not only had a much expanded version of the metal/glass/plastic/cardboard program we previously had, but they also had an additional bin for organic matter like food scraps. In the two weeks we were there we ended up throwing out one full kitchen garbage bag of stuff, and that was it. Everything else was recycled. People there seemed to care a lot more about the environment. Most people drove small cars, and cycling was quite common. So basically, even if effective programs are in place, if the will isn't there to use them, they suddenly will become less effective. It's going to take people actually being willing to make personal sacrifices for real change to occur, and unfortunately there are certain demographics of people I cannot see being willing to do so. Corporations are, of course, a completely different beast. | ||
|
ZerOCoolSC2
8960 Posts
I think if you made it like a game or something, where people who recycle get some kind of points towards a reward, may help. Say, if you join the recycling program and recycle 50 lbs a week or whatever, then by tax time, you get to claim that on your taxes or receive a rebate of some kind. Lower energy bills or something. If you treat recycling like a utility and tax people who don't, then maybe? | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States22991 Posts
On June 02 2019 09:23 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote: There are recycling programs through a lot of the Midwest, but like you said, the will to care or attempt to make a change, just isn't there. I also think that apartment complexes should be required by law to have a recycling system set up for tenants. The amount of waste I see is incredible in mine and it maybe houses 500 people. I'm talking about people basically throwing entire apartments away into the garbage bin. I've seen so many couches, mattresses and chairs thrown in these things, it's mind numbing. People don't have a recycling option here unless like you said, they take it upon themselves and they don't. I think if you made it like a game or something, where people who recycle get some kind of points towards a reward, may help. Say, if you join the recycling program and recycle 50 lbs a week or whatever, then by tax time, you get to claim that on your taxes or receive a rebate of some kind. Lower energy bills or something. If you treat recycling like a utility and tax people who don't, then maybe? Think the part people might have missed is that the improvements the US (and much of Europe) has made has actually just been shipping our pollution to poorer countries. While India, despite it's more moderate goals, (it's developing infrastructure on a scale the US hasn't for decades) it's still expected to keep it's contributions to the problem below the necessary threshold while countries like the US and Canada focus on superficial recycling programs which have netted essentially no progress in the last 30 years when we account for all the relocated pollution we then blame the countries we dump it in for. Countries like the US and Canada show no signs of coming remotely close to the already insufficient Paris goals whereas India is meeting (maybe exceeding) theirs We're not going to tax/credit our way to fixing this, particularly by taxing the masses instead of the people doing the damage imo. EDIT: As the scientists said, we have until 2030 and there's no way we get where we need to be focusing on consumer recycling (which again is basically resulted in no progress for the US and much of Europe on net). | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
ZerOCoolSC2
8960 Posts
And like I said before, the effort it will take to get everyone is currently beyond me. I don't know how it would go, but it's better to start with a general framework and work from there. I proposed it in this thread to get feedback and ideas flowing. Something we've largely done. Also, when you mention that the US and Canada hasn't done anything, you have to remember how long these countries have been industrialized and how slowly changing the main method of manufacturing, building, and planning will be. They're trying, but it is a slow process. Whereas India, China, and other countries, as has been done before, can take the successes the westernized countries have made and leave behind the failures. So of course, in that regard, India will be leading the US, Canada, and the EU to some degree when it comes to making a smaller impact. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States22991 Posts
On June 02 2019 10:25 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote: The point I'm making is you have to start somewhere GH. And what would make you think large corps wouldn't get taxed as well? Everyone puts some skin in the game, no matter what (except those on subsidized or fixed incomes, they get a break but still would have to pay something). That they have long ago bought the political system and are typically able to avoid much, if not all of their tax responsibility. "Starting somewhere" isn't going to work and isn't a plan. It's going to need much more explanation to be anything more than a platitude. And like I said before, the effort it will take to get everyone is currently beyond me. I don't know how it would go, but it's better to start with a general framework and work from there. I proposed it in this thread to get feedback and ideas flowing. Something we've largely done. Have to raise class consciousness imo. Also, when you mention that the US and Canada hasn't done anything, you have to remember how long these countries have been industrialized and how slowly changing the main method of manufacturing, building, and planning will be. They're trying, but it is a slow process. Whereas India, China, and other countries, as has been done before, can take the successes the westernized countries have made and leave behind the failures. So of course, in that regard, India will be leading the US, Canada, and the EU to some degree when it comes to making a smaller impact. Except they aren't trying? Or if they are trying 30 years of "trying" got us nowhere and we literally won't survive that again. We can make excuses for why the wealthiest country on the planet (and others like Canada and Europe) have failed so terribly over the last 30 years but it doesn't resolve the issue. Meanwhile countries like China are not only leading the way in green energy "China Is Set To Become The World's Renewable Energy Superpower" They are actually making serious environmental improvements (unlike the western countries that besmirch them). SHANGHAI - China's carbon trading system has enabled the country to reach its 2020 carbon emissions target in 2017, China's special representative on climate change has said. Xie Zhenhua said at the Green Carbon Summit held here Monday that by the end of 2017, China had cut carbon dioxide emissions per unit of GDP by 46 percent from the 2005 level, fulfilling its commitment to reduce CO2 emissions by 40 to 45 percent from the 2005 level by 2020. From 2005 to 2015, China's economy grew by 1.48 times, and at the same time, the carbon intensity dropped by 38.6 percent. In 2016, the rate continued to fall by 6.6 percent year on year. www.chinadaily.com.cn People fixate on the overall production rather than per capita or per unit of GDP, because by metrics that account for circumstances in the slightest, it's obvious countries like China and India are doing far better than countries like the US as the data shows. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
ZerOCoolSC2
8960 Posts
On June 02 2019 10:47 GreenHorizons wrote: That they have long ago bought the political system and are typically able to avoid much, if not all of their tax responsibility. "Starting somewhere" isn't going to work and isn't a plan. It's going to need much more explanation to be anything more than a platitude. Have to raise class consciousness imo. Except they aren't trying? Or if they are trying 30 years of "trying" got us nowhere and we literally won't survive that again. We can make excuses for why the wealthiest country on the planet (and others like Canada and Europe) have failed so terribly over the last 30 years but it doesn't resolve the issue. Meanwhile countries like China are not only leading the way in green energy "China Is Set To Become The World's Renewable Energy Superpower" They are actually making serious environmental improvements (unlike the western countries that besmirch them). www.chinadaily.com.cn The thing you constantly fail to realize, is that these corporations, Alphabet, Microsoft, Facebook, etc are already converting their energy consumption model. And if you give incentives or tax breaks, they'll be more than happy to make recycling changes. I know for a fact that all of Amazon warehouses have recycling receptacles for employees placed literally everywhere. I'm going to venture a guess that most of the largest corporations have that. What we need is better management of waste like JimmiC and others have stated. That is the problem we are facing. Now, if you can wrap your head around what I've posted, I said I wanted to start a conversation with ideas. You crying that I don't have a plan isn't helping. I said I don't have a plan because the scope is beyond me. But I can start a discussion on a potential framework and work from there. I don't see you contributing much besides nonsense, so unless you have something substantial to add, take a backseat. Lastly, you're arguing my last paragraph because? I've already admitted that what the US and others aren't doing isn't enough but that the scale of such an operation is going to be slow. Furthermore, you confirmed the last sentence that of course China would lead the world in this area because they can see where the US and some EU countries failed. They are doing literally what I typed. What was your point? | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States22991 Posts
On June 02 2019 11:06 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote: The thing you constantly fail to realize, is that these corporations, Alphabet, Microsoft, Facebook, etc are already converting their energy consumption model. And if you give incentives or tax breaks, they'll be more than happy to make recycling changes. I know for a fact that all of Amazon warehouses have recycling receptacles for employees placed literally everywhere. I'm going to venture a guess that most of the largest corporations have that. What we need is better management of waste like JimmiC and others have stated. That is the problem we are facing. I'm not a big supporter of the "invisible hand" theory and leave that to Republicans but I've noticed an increased expectation for market solutions (and "personal responsibility") that simply haven't and won't manifest from people ostensibly on "the left". Now, if you can wrap your head around what I've posted lmao, please just leave stuff like this out. I said I wanted to start a conversation with ideas. You crying that I don't have a plan isn't helping. This sounds remarkably familiar... I said I don't have a plan because the scope is beyond me. But I can start a discussion on a potential framework and work from there. I don't see you contributing much besides nonsense, so unless you have something substantial to add, take a backseat. Really? This is you guys on revolution to a T. Lastly, you're arguing my last paragraph because? I've already admitted that what the US and others aren't doing isn't enough but that the scale of such an operation is going to be slow. Because it threatens our entire species, but especially the most marginalized people around the world...? Furthermore, you confirmed the last sentence that of course China would lead the world in this area because they can see where the US and some EU countries failed. They are doing literally what I typed. What was your point? The US has seen it's (and others) failures too yet we're not leading in solar, we're not engaged in a massive infrastructure overhaul, we're not taking the wealthiest countries assets and putting them towards the problem in proportion to the degree needed. That countries like China and India are isn't some ability derived from observing the US, it's just listening to the science while having the ability for the government to tell the corporations what to do instead of the other way around (granted capitalists have been gaining ground in China and rapidly cutting into that progress as it becomes increasingly profitable to do so). | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States22991 Posts
Just 100 companies have been the source of more than 70% of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions since 1988 | ||
|
ZerOCoolSC2
8960 Posts
| ||
|
mikedebo
Canada4341 Posts
I honestly think that for an average citizen, it's more impactful on this topic to be politically active rather than to reduce your own consumption. There was some stat floated the other day in one of the climate subreddits about how it only takes 3% of the population to get behind a cause for it to cause substantial political change. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
| ||
